Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) deleted when assessment was framed u/s 143(3) proving that the assessee had cooperated in the assessment proceedings
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2972 (2019) (05) ITAT
Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties:
Pramila Kumari Vs DCIT (2011) 49 CCH 0401
In the instant set of appeals filed by respective assessee(s) they had challenged the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
The only grievance in these batch of appeals was levy of penalty of Rs. 10,000/- u/s 271(1)(b) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for non compliance to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) during the course of assessment proceedings.
The Tribunal noted that the assessment had been framed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act.
The Tribunal opined that in all cases as the assessment orders had been framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, it proved that the assessee had cooperated in the assessment proceedings.
Accordingly, the Tribunal deleted the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act.
Only days on which actual services rendered by company to be considered in computing threshold for constitution of permanent establishment…
Depreciation on goodwill in the hands of amalgamated company upheld as Assessing Officer had taken a plausible view in line…
The ICAI has announced that provisions of the Income-tax Act, 2025 shall be applicable to CA exams conducted from 1st…
Addition u/s 68 deleted as there was no cash trail, rotation of funds, or incriminating evidences, no enquiry conducted into…
In case of re-allotment of flat by builder, stamp duty valuation would be with reference to date of booking of…
When information contained in loose papers not corroborated with assessee, there is absolutely no room for presumption that it belongs…