Income Tax : A summary of key penalties under the Income Tax Act for AY 2026-27, covering defaults from late filing and non-payment to misrepor...
Income Tax : Understand the penalties, interest, and disallowance of expenditure under Section 201 for failure to comply with TDS provisions in...
Income Tax : Simplified penalty timelines under Section 275 effective April 2025, including changes in penalty powers, omissions, and clarifica...
Income Tax : Income Tax Act amendments propose penalties by Assessing Officers instead of Joint Commissioners. Omission of section 271BB and ch...
Income Tax : Post-Finance Bill 2025, penalties under specified sections of the Income-tax Act will be levied by the Assessing Officer, with Joi...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that territorial jurisdiction depends on the location of the Assessing Officer handling the assessment. Since the ...
Income Tax : ITAT Raipur held that penalty proceedings initiated after unreasonable delay violated the statutory limitation prescribed under Se...
Income Tax : Orissa High Court held that assessment order set aside as proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act initiated without se...
Income Tax : ITAT Chandigarh upheld penalty under Section 271C as exemption under Section 10(5) applies only to travel within India, requiring ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that revision under Section 263 is invalid where the Assessing Officer examined records and adopted a plausible ...
Madras High Court halts Rs. 9403.09 Cr Income Tax demand against Cognizant Technology Solutions India. Detailed analysis and implications of the order.
Since assessee had deliberately not avoided TDS and there was no contumacious conduct on the part of the assessee, therefore, penalty was not leviable for not deducting TDS on foreign remittances.
In a landmark case, Oriental Bank challenges penalties imposed by ITAT Jaipur for TDS non-compliance. Learn about the legal battle and its implications.
Read about Supreme Court’s decision in US Technologies case regarding TDS penalty under Section 271C of Income Tax Act, 1961, for delayed remittance.
ITAT Delhi held that the assessee has not committed any violation of provision of Chapter XVII B of the Act by making payment towards External Development Charges (EDC) to Directorate of Town and Country Planning, Haryana (Haryana Government) (DGTCP) through banking channel favoring Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA).
ITAT Delhi held that initiation of action u/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of shortfall in TDS on year end provisions reported in Form 3CD of the assessee cannot be faulted. Accordingly, matter remanded to AO.
An analysis of ITAT Delhi’s order in ITO Vs Santur Builders Pvt Ltd, stating that TDS is not applicable on EDC payments to HUDA on behalf of State Government.
Analysis of ITAT Ahmedabad’s decision in Unity Dye Chem Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT case. Penalty under section 271C not applicable if TDS non-deduction supported by Form 15G/H.
In a landmark ruling, Delhi High Court quashes TDS penal action against DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt Ltd for the FY 2013-14. Detailed verdict here.
ITAT Delhi, in the ACIT Vs TV Today Network Ltd case, ruled that no penalty for failure to deduct TDS is applicable if the assessee added back the expense on which the tax was not deducted.
