Tag: penalty 271(1)(c)

Penalty 271(1)(c) for claiming higher Housing Loan Interest deduction u/s 24(b) deleted. AO did not detect it but noticed from reply of assessee

Penalty 271(1)(c) for claiming higher Housing Loan Interest deduction u/s 24(b) deleted. The AO did not detect mistake but noticed it from the reply of the assessee – ITAT Judgment ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 1124 (2017) (02) ITAT Assessment Year : 2008-09 Date/Month of Pronouncement: February, 2017 …

Penalty 271(1)(c)-Explanation need not proved completely. As long as the explanation is reasonable and bonafide penalty need not be imposed-ITAT

Penalty 271(1)(c)-Explanation need not proved completely. As long as the explanation is reasonable and bonafide penalty need not be imposed-ITAT   ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 1116 (2017) (02) ITAT Assessment Year : 2008-09 Date of Pronouncement: 30-01-2017 Brief Facts of the Case: During the assessment, an addition …

No concealment penalty-non disclosure of disallowance 40(a)(ia) in computation of income as the issue is debatable due to HC decisions

No concealment penalty-non disclosure of disallowance 40(a)(ia) in computation of income as the issue is debatable due to High Court decisions ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 1076 (2016) (12) ITAT Assessment Year: 2008-09 Date of Judgment: 01-12-2016 Brief Facts of the Case: During the scrutiny proceedings of the …

No Concealment if return revised due to search of other person when assessee filed it voluntarily and no proceedings initiated u/s 153 against him-ITAT

No Concealment if return revised due to search of other person when assessee voluntarily filed revised ITR and no proceedings were initiated u/s 153 against him-ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 1052 (2016) (11) ITAT Important Case considered: Ravi Sud vs. ACIT (2015) 39 ITR (T) 356 CIT vs. …

No Penalty 271(1)(c) even if quantum proceedings upheld additions. Merely because a bona fide explanation did not find favour, penalty not justified

No Penalty 271(1)(c) even if quantum proceedings upheld additions. Merely because a bona fide explanation did not find favour, it would not justify the levy of concealment penalty-ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 1034 (2016) (10) ITAT Brief Facts of the Case: A search operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, …

No income concealment us 271(1(c) on gift under explanation 5A. NSC declared us 153A was received as inheriting, gift from father, grandfather-ITAT

No income concealment us 271(1(c) on gift under explanation 5A. NSC declared us 153A was received as inheriting, gift from father, grandfather-ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 1032 (2016) (10) ITAT  Important case law cited: Sheraton Apparels Vs. ACIT (2002) 256 ITR 20 Brief Facts of the Case: The …
Subscribe to ABCAUS Newsletter

Get reliable, authentic and latest updates on taxation/corporate and other laws in your mail box free.



After subscribing, please check your email (including spam or junk folder) and activate the subscription link by clicking it.