Tag: income tax penalty
Penalty u/s 271D deleted due to ‘reasonable cause’ as assessee belonged to Schedule Tribe and income earned by him was exempt u/s 10(26) of the Act. In a recent judgment, the ITAT Guwahati deleted penalty u/s 271D for violation of section 269SS observing that there was a ‘reasonable …
Penalty u/s 271D not automatic. AO is required to find out that even if there was any failure, the same was without a reasonable cause. In a recent judgment, the Bangalore ITAT has deleted penalty u/s 271D for violation of provisions of section 269SS observing that Levy of …
Penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) confirmed on Sub Registrar for non compliance of statutory notice u/s 133(6) calling for information of immovable property. In a recent judgment, ITAT Lucknow has confirmed penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 levied on the Sub Registrar for non compliance of statutory …
Penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) for not furnishing information to notice u/s 133(6) deleted In a recent judgment, ITAT Lucknow has deleted Penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) imposed on Sub-registrar for not furnishing information of properties registered in response to notice u/s 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ABCAUS Case Law …
Penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) deleted as notices gave assessee only two hours time to comply and that too on a public holiday i.e. Sunday In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble ITAT has deleted the Penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) for non compliance of notices, as notices were issued on Sunday and …
Assessee was liable to pay penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) on the first default as thereafter, the AO could have proceeded to frame an ex-parte order – ITAT In a recent judgment, ITAT has deleted the penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) for multiple default in non-compliance to the notice holding that assessee …
No penalty can be levied if AO failed to record such satisfaction in assessment order. Penalty proceedings would necessarily be initiated in the quantum assessment order itself. In a recent judgment, ITAT has deleted income tax penalty u/s 271D and 271E holding that no penalty can be levied …
Under section 271AAB undisclosed income also means additional income due to bogus expense recorded in the books of accounts – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3820 (2023) (11) ITAT Important Case Laws relied upon by parties:ACIT vs. Sri Mahender Kumar AgarwalCIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal, 70 taxmann.com 95 Radhey …
No penalty u/s 271F as due to mistake of DDO wrong PAN was mentioned in 26AS and assessee was precluded from filing the return of income – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3808 (2023) (09) ITAT In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by …
Only five days time allowed to reply questionnaire was not sufficient opportunity. ITAT deletes penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3786 (2023) (08) ITAT In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax …
