Tag: penalty 271(1)(c)

There is a difference in “facts not proved” and “facts disproved” and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can be levied only for the latter

In a latest judgment, ITAT Chennai has quashed penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment holding that  there is a difference in “facts not proved” and “facts disproved” and penalty can be levied only for the latter. Case Law Details: ITA No.1730/Mds./2015 Assessment Year :2010-11 Mr.R.A.Palanisamy vs. Income Tax Officer Date of …

Penalty 271(1)(c) – Limitation provisions apply as per law in force at the time of filing of return

Penalty 271(1)(c) – Limitation provisions u/s 275(1A) apply as per law in force at the time of filing of return INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR I.T.A No.137(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year: 1994-95 Income Tax Officer (Appellant) vs. K.D. Bali (Respondent) Date of Order: 04-03-2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): This …

Penalty 271(1)(c) interest on income-tax refund not added to income but disclosed in notes to accounts

Penalty 271(1)(c) interest on income-tax refund not added to income but disclosed in notes to accounts as contingent income HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ITA 291 of 2009 CIT-II Ves.  PILANI INVESTMENT & INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. Coram: Hon’ble Justice Girish Chandra Gupta And Hon’ble Justice Asha Arora Date on which Judgment …

Penalty 271(1)(c) deleted for claiming deduction u/s 54 for two residential houses for ambiguity

Penalty 271(1)(c) deleted for claiming deduction u/s 54 for two residential houses for ambiguity before amendment in 2014 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW ITA No.01/LKW/2015 Assessment year:2006-07 Sandeep Shukla (Appellant)  vs. ACIT (Respondent) Date of Order: 04-03-2016 ORDER PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. This is assessee’s appeal …