Month: April 2016

No penalty imposable u/s 271(1)(c) where High Court accepted substantial question of law u/s 260A against quantum appeal showing that issue is debatable

In a recent judgment, ITAT Delhi has stated that where High Court accepted substantial question of law u/s 260A, against the quantum appeal, itself shows that issue was debatable and in such a case no penalty was imposable u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Case Law Details: ITA …

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for mistake of not disclosing Long Term Capital Gain LTCG on the land part comprised in the block of Factory Building sold

In a recent judgment, ITAT Delhi has set aside penalty u/s 271(1)(c) and remanded the matter to CIT(A) for mistake of assessee not disclosing Long Term Capital Gain LTCG on the land comprised in the block of Factory Building sold. Case Law Details: ITA No. 5939/Del./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 …

Section 69/69C mandates that assessee must have incurred any expenditure. Additions can not be made by just estimating the expenditure-ITAT

ITAT Lucknow in a recent judgment has held that section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides that the assessee must have incurred any expenditure and the additions can not be made by the Assessing Officer by just estimated the expenditure. Case Law Details: ITA Nos.35,36 & 37/Lkw/2016 Assessment years: 2004-05, …