Income Tax : Discover penalties and prosecutions under the Income Tax Act, 1961, including default conditions, quantum of penalties, and potent...
Income Tax : Learn about penalty provisions under the IT Act, including penalties for defaults in tax payment, income reporting, and more. Key ...
Income Tax : Explore how seizure of documents can impact audit deadlines under Section 44AB and defenses against Section 271B penalties for aud...
Income Tax : Dive into Section 271B's mandates, penalties, and exemptions under the Income Tax Act. Explore real cases, challenges, and strateg...
Income Tax : Explore recent ITAT judgment in Rakesh Kr. Jha vs. ITO, delving into interpretation of Sections 271A and 271B, highlighting confli...
Income Tax : All Odisha Tax Advocates Association has filed an PIl before Orissa High Court with following Prayers- (i) Admit the Writ Petition...
Income Tax : ITAT Cochin deletes penalty under Section 271B for delayed tax audit, citing the demise of the managing partner as a reasonable ...
Income Tax : Provisions of Section 44AB, which mandate Tax audit, are not applicable to fictional income provisions like Section section 68, 69...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore set aside penalty orders under Section 271B due to improper notice delivery to an unrelated email ID and failure to...
Income Tax : ITAT Bangalore held that penalty order under section 272A(2)(e) of the Income Tax Act has to be passed within reasonable time. Sin...
Income Tax : ITAT Surat remands penalty case under Section 271B to AO, ruling that bank transactions alone cannot determine turnover. Fresh con...
ITAT Chennai held that as per assigning reasons for delay in filing audit report under section 44AB is venial technical breach and accordingly penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act not leviable.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee furnished the return of income and audit report only after issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act not leviable as failure was due to ignorance and misguidance.
ITAT Kolkata held that dismissal of assessment order passed under section 143(3) on erroneous reasoning that dispute was resolved via Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. Fresh adjudication directed to decide all the appeals on merits.
ITAT delete penalty levied for failure to get accounts audited and for filing tax audit report belatedly, on the grounds that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause due to its pathetic condition and heavy losses incurred in its business.
When assessee entertained bona-fide belief that its account were not subject to audit u/s 44AB, it would certainly constitute reasonable cause for not obtaining the audit report and, therefore, question of imposing of penalty u/s 271B does not arise.
Bablu Kumar Harinarayan Gupta Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) ITAT held that it is not fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271B merely because the appellant was unable to substantiate the submission that the appellant is only commission agent because there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to get the accounts audited […]
Validity of the ICAI guidance for calculating the turnover in case of derivatives has been reiterated by various judicial precedence. ICAI as an expert body of accountants and guidance note on tax audit issued by them can be relied upon in absence of any statutory provision for computation of turnover in such cases.
The assessee pleaded a reasonable cause before the AO that the audit could not be carried out because of ill-health of his wife, which further worsened the family problems. Section 271B is subject to provisions of section 273B which provides that in case of a reasonable cause, penalty under the concerned section need not be imposed.
Devki Nandan Bindal Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) The Board has clarified that the turnover does not include the sales affected on behalf of the principals and only the gross commission has to be considered for the purposes of section 44AB where the agents act only as an agent of his constituent and never acts as […]
Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Indore) Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Indore) The assessee has challenged the penalty to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/-levied under Section 271B of the Act. The assessee, a Government company, wherein appointment of Auditor in the case of the appellant was governed by the provision of section 619(2) of the Companies […]
