Daily Archive: Sunday, August 7, 2016

Penalty 271(1)(c) can not be imposed when High Court admits substantial question of law on addition making apparent that it is debatable – ITAT

Author: | Categories: Income Tax, ITAT, Judgments No comments
Penalty 271(1)(c) can not be imposed when High Court admits substantial question of law on quantum addition making apparent that addition is debatable – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 982 2016 (08) ITAT Assessment Year: 2005-06 Date/Month of Judgment: August 2016 Brief Facts of the Case: During the scrutiny

 

Penalty 271(1)(c) for claiming Short Term Capital Gain STCG as Long Term Capital Gain LTCG and deduction us 54F quashed by the ITAT

Author: | Categories: Income Tax, ITAT, Judgments No comments
Penalty 271(1)(c) for claiming STCG as LTCG and deduction us 54F quashed by the ITAT holding that if the assessee had not concealed any fact while filing the return and filed the copies of the document along with the return, merely because the sale proceeds were shown as a long term capital gain instead

 

Penalty us 271FA for late filing AIR Return quashed. Country’s tax laws are complex, complicated and require assistance of specialised tax practitioners

Author: | Categories: Income Tax, ITAT, Judgments No comments
Penalty us 271FA for late filing AIR Return quashed by ITAT considering that the tax laws of the country are complex and complicated and require assistance of specialised tax practitioners.  ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 980 2016 (08) ITAT Date/Month of Judgment: August 2016 Important Judgments relied by the assessee: Motilal Padampat