Tag: penalty u/s 271(1)(c)
No Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on filing revised return when no such questionnaire was issued with notice u/s 143(2) ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3463 (2021) (03) ITAT Important case law relied referred:CIT vs. SSA’s Emerald MeadowsPr. CIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd.ITO vs. Sitashri Trading & Finance …
Some tax evasion sought by assessee is a necessary condition for imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c). What has to be shown is whether, and if so, how, assessee can be said to have sought to evade tax. ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3433 (2021) (01) ITAT Important case law …
Non striking of applicable limb of penalty clause u/s 271(1)(c) in notice-Supreme Court dismisses SLP of the Income Tax Department ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3426 (2020) (11) Important case law relied upon by the parties:Commissioner of Income Tax v/s Shri Samson PerincheryPrincipal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s New …
No concealment when all information available for determining income given voluntarily by assessee either in return or at the time of assessment ABACUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3380 (2020) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT vs. Samson Perinchery 392 ITR 4 (Bom). Ventura Textiles Ltd., vs. …
Whether an expenditure is capital or revenue squarely fall within the ambit of a debatable issue. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) deleted ABACUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3379 (2020) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:CIT vs. Vegan International Ltd. 2 Taxmann.com 140 In the instant case, the …
Law does not debar assessee from making a claim which he believes is plausible and knowing that it will be examined by AO ABACUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3371 (2020) (08) HC Important case law relied upon by the parties:Alpati Venkataramiah v/s. CIT – 57 ITR 185 (SC)Union of …
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) upheld despite notice without striking off the not applicable charge as in penalty order AO specified the applicable limb ABACUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3359 (2020) (08) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Shweta Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO,B. D. Mundra & Sons, …
Concealment Penalty cannot be levied on rejection of a bonafide claim. Even assessee with great expertise could make silly mistake ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3337 (2020) (07) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Price Waterhouse Coopers (P) Ltd vs. CIT 348 ITR 306 SCCIT vs. Somany …
Penalty proceedings initiated on one limb and penalty imposed on two limbs invalid ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3336 (2020) (07) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Shri Narendra P. Musale vs. ITOCommissioner of Income Tax Vs. Samson Perinchery 392 ITR 4 In the instant case, …
No Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) merely due to quantum addition without making fresh verification during penalty proceedings ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3299 (2020) (04) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:National Textiles Vs. CIT 249 ITR 125. The issue involved in this case was related to penalty …
