Tag: penalty u/s 271(1)(c)
Mere agreeing to increased net profit rate, by itself was no ground to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) when it was already higher compared to preceding assessment years – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2840 (2019) (03) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties Harigopal Singh …
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) deleted for claiming depreciation on assets for which invoices were raised by the vendor in the name of the other firm – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2796 (2019) (02) ITAT The appeal in the instant case was filed by assessee against the appellate …
Not disclosing salary was not concealment when TDS also not claimed by the assessee. ITAT deleted penalty holding that there was a reasonable cause provided in Section 273B ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2761 (2019) (01) ITAT This assessee had challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income …
When assessee during assessment proceedings voluntarily admitted mistake then mere absence of revised return would not justify penalty u/s 271(1)(c) ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2738 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: CIT Vs. Man Industries Ltd.(2018) 164 DTR (Bom) 165 CIT Vs. Somany Evergreen Knits …
Validity of Penalty notice non striking off relevant limb u/s 271(1)(c) upheld when subsequent opportunity notices sent by AO were not challenged ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2731 (2019) (01) ITAT The assessee had filed the instant appeal against the order passed by the CIT(A) upholding the penalty …
When assessee surrendered exemption claimed on the condition that penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are not initiated there was no question of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2698 (2019) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: CIT vs. Manjunatha …
AO is under obligation to specify the limb of section 271(1)(c) at the time of initiation as well as at the time of levy of penalty. ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2689 (2018) (12) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon:CIT Vs. Shri Samson PerincheryCIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton and …
CIT is empowered to invoke revisionry powers u/s 263 to direct AO to initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2687 (2018) (12) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon:CIT Vs. Ashok ConstructionsCIT Vs. Surendra Prasad AgarwalV. Ramanamurthy RajuStar Diamond Tools Vs. ITOCIT Vs. Paramanand …
Penalty U/s 271(1)(c)-Unspecified charge in notice can be made good with a clear-cut finding in penalty order – ITAT explains Law on non-striking off clauses in Notice u/s 274 ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2678 (2018) (12) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon:CIT vs. SSA’S Emerald Meadows (2016) 242 …
Mere making a claim for set off of losses not furnishing inaccurate particulars of income as it was personal opinion with regard to income-tax – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2646 (2018) (11) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: CIT Vs. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. (2010) 322 …
