Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : The article explains how offences such as wilful tax evasion, failure to file returns, non-payment of TDS/TCS, falsification of re...
Income Tax : This article outlines major offences under the Income-tax Act that may result in prosecution, including tax evasion, non-payment o...
Income Tax : This article explains the statutory powers of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to waive or reduce penalties in genuine c...
Income Tax : This article outlines major penalties under the Income-tax Act for defaults involving tax payments, return filing, TDS compliance,...
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 : The Tribunal held that AY 2010-11 was outside the permissible ten-year assessment block computable under Section 153A. Applying th...
Income Tax : The issue was denial of concessional tax regime due to incorrect ITR disclosure and alleged delay in filing Form 10-IC. The Tribun...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that audit under section 44AB depends on turnover, not taxability of income. Exempt entities must still comply i...
Income Tax : The issue was whether delay in filing appeal without strong documentary proof should be condoned. The ITAT held that when sufficie...
Income Tax : The issue involved arbitrary estimation of income at 20% and 5% of turnover. The Tribunal reduced it to 4% due to lack of supporti...
ITAT Chennai held that penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act cannot be levied for venial technical breach without any mala fide intention of the assessee as tax audit report submitted before completion of assessment proceedings.
An analysis of the landmark case Taranjeet Singh Alagh vs ITO, in which the ITAT Delhi provides key clarifications on the penalties under section 271B of the Income Tax Act relating to account audits and book maintenance.
A significant ITAT Kolkata ruling declares no penalty for delayed filing of books of account due to reasonable causes under Section 273B of Income Tax Act, 1961. Explore the details of this precedent-setting case.
ITAT Visakhapatnam held that penalty u/s 271B of the Income Tax Act not imposable as provision of section 44AB of the Income Tax Act doesn’t apply to income that is treated as income from other sources.
The ITAT Cochin has upheld the penalty imposed on Paravur Service Cooperative Bank for its failure to furnish the audit report of its accounts audited by the Cooperative Department Auditor within the specified date under Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act.
An ITAT ruling in the case of Bhartiya Shiksha Prachar Samiti vs DCIT highlights the application of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act and its implications for auditing requirements. Learn more about the details and impacts of this landmark case.
ITAT Bangalore has ruled in Bandenawaz Mulla vs. ACIT that no audit can be conducted under section 44AB of Income Tax Act when assessee has not maintained books of account.
Explore the ruling in the case of Kartick Das Bairagya Vs ITO at ITAT Kolkata, which clarifies the conditions for non-imposition of penalty under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act.
Understand the implications of the Jayaraj Charles Vs ITO case where ITAT Chennai ruled no penalty should be imposed under section 271B of the Income Tax Act when a return isn’t visible on the e-filing portal.
Exploring recent decision of ITAT Mumbai in Rasik Nemchand Pethad Vs DCIT where it was determined that Section 271B penalty doesn’t apply when there’s reasonable cause for failure to comply with provisions.
