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 : 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 : ITAT upholds penalty against taxpayer for cash repayment of loans, contravening Section 269T of Income-tax Act. Explore implicatio...
Income Tax : Explore the impact of Income Tax Sections 269SS, 269ST, 269SU, and 269T on transactions via Journal/Book Entries. Learn about legi...
Income Tax : The Hyderabad ITAT held that only the actual period lost during the limitation period can be excluded under Explanation-1 to Secti...
Income Tax : The Telangana High Court set aside a penalty under Section 271D after finding that the assessment order contained no recorded sati...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that levy of penalty under Section 271D requires pending or completed assessment proceedings containing findings o...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that unverified third-party excel sheets without corroborative evidence cannot justify additions under Sections 69 o...
Income Tax : The ITAT ruled that penalty proceedings under Section 271D are invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to record satisfaction in as...
Income Tax : It is a settled position that period of limitation of penalty proceedings under section 271D and 271E of the Act is governed by th...
Income Tax : It has been brought to notice of CBDT that there are conflicting interpretations of various High Courts on the issue whether the l...
The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal quashes penalties for being time-barred and invalidates a reassessment notice, clarifying key tax law provisions on limitation and sanctioning authority.
AO held that assessee had made repayment of the loan to M/s. Tata Finance Corporation in that financial year to the extent of Rs. 6,71,939 in cash against the loan taken for commercial vehicle.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that reasonable cause has been shown for non-compliance with the provisions contained in Section 269T of the Act and further it is not disputed that the transaction is genuine and bona fide.
ITAT Pune held that delay in filing of an appeal before CIT(A) condoned due to company’s financial position and non-pursuing of appeals by tax consultant. Accordingly, matter remitted to file of CIT(A) for denovo adjudication.
ITAT Bangalore cancels ₹2.20 lakh penalty on Rajiv Duseja for cash loans from family. Cites precedents on genuine transactions & reasonable cause.
ITAT Jaipur sets aside addition and penalty against Mukesh Kumar Agarwal due to lack of valid jurisdiction and time-barred penalty order.
ITAT Kolkata removes ₹1 crore penalty under Sec 271E, ruling cash transaction between sister concerns as reimbursement, not loan repayment.
ITAT Jaipur quashes penalty under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act in Anil Sharma vs. ITO due to absent recorded satisfaction.
Delhi High Court held that imposition of penalty under section 271DA of the Income Tax Act is justifiable since there is no inordinately and inexplicably delay in initiation of penalty proceedings. Accordingly, writ dismissed.
ITAT Bangalore held that penalty order under section 272A(2)(e) of the Income Tax Act has to be passed within reasonable time. Since, the penalty order is not passed within reasonable time, the same is liable to be quashed.
