Tag: concealment penalty
Concealment penalty deleted for excess salary appearing in Form 26AS on revision by employer. ITAT accepted assessee’s explanation as bonafide & genuine ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3160 (2019) (09) ITAT Concealment penalty for excess salary appearing in Form 26AS In the instant case, the appeal was filed by …
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on disallowance of notional interest on debit balances in capital account of some of the partners deleted as in totality, partners capital had net credit balance. ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3158 (2019) (09) ITAT In the instant case, the appeal was filed by the assessee …
Penalty 271(1)(c) deleted as employee was misguided by employer cooperative bank that interest income was exempt ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3155 (2019) (09) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Badshah Parshad Vs. CIT, 127 ITA 601 (Patna)Rave Entertainment P.Ltd. Vs. CIT, 376 ITR 544 (All)Garden Silk …
Penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) without specifying specific charge quashed. The decisions relied by Revenue rejected by the Tribunal ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3117 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Jagdamba Prasad Gupta, Delhi vs. ACITSundaram Finance Ltd., vs. CIT 403 ITR 407 (Mad.) …
Application of correct limb of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is a question of fact and not a question of law. ITAT dismissed issue raised before it for the first time ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3114 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Sundaram Finance 403 ITR …
No Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for mere disallowance in quantum proceedings in the absence of any falsity in the explanation offered ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3104 (2019) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Limited (322 ITR 158) (sc)Price Waterhouse Coopers …
Concealment penalty on filing revised return after enquiry by Investigation Wing deleted as revised return was within the stipulated period prescribed u/s 139(5) ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3061 (2019) (07) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties:CIT Vs. Kulwant Singh’ (2019) 104 Taxmann.com 340 The instant …
On statutory disallowances u/s 40(a)(ia) 40A(3) there cannot be any penalty u/s 271(1)(c) especially when assessee not claimed deduction of these expenses ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 3016 (2019) (06) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties: CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, 359 ITR …
No concealment Penalty if assessee’s explanation not found false, but not accepted on account of substantiation with solid evidences ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2920 (2019) (05) ITAT The assessee was in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A) in confirming penalty imposed by the …
No concealment penalty for bonafide error of chartered accountant in claiming wrong deduction u/s 80IC by choosing incorrect initial assessment year ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2864 (2019) (04) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Price Water Coopers reported in 348 ITR 306 Zoom Communication …