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-2711c not imposable if income estimated u/s 144 where books of accounts not produced

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR ITA No.293(Asr)/2013 Assessment year: 2005-06 Income Tax Officer (Appellant)  vs. M/s. Age Construction Pvt. Ltd. (Respondent) Date of Order: 04-03/2016 ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, JM: This is the Department’s appeal for the assessment year 2005-06 against the order, dated 06.02.2013, passed by the …

Penalty 271(1)(c) limitation provisions u/s 2751a 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 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of learned CIT(A), dated 05.03. 2014 for Asst. Year 1994-95. …

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 delivered: 02.02.2016 GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA J. The Revenue has come up in appeal u/s.260A of the Income Tax Act, …

Rationalisation of penalty provisions budget- 2016-17

Under the existing provisions, penalty on account of concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is leviable under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. In order to rationalize and bring objectivity, certainty and clarity in the penalty provisions, it is proposed that section 271 …

Penalty 271(1)(c) deleted for claiming deduction u/s 54 for two residential houses . There was scope of 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 directed against the order passed by learned CIT(A)-II, Kanpur dated 11/09/2014 for the assessment year 2006-07. 2. The …