Home Highlights June 2013 Year 2013 This

You may also like:

1. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - merely for the reason that the said expenditure was claimed as a revenue expenditure would not justify imposition of penalty under Sec....

2. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Making an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere making of a...

3. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) involved an addition based on estimation by the Assessing Officer, which was later re-estimated by the CIT(A) to disallow 10% of the...

4. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Revenue expenditure or not - expenses on NPA’s - merely because the assessee has claimed the expenditure, which claim was not accepted or not...

5. Levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - What is clear is that the assessee has disclosed necessary facts in relation to various expenses including expenditure relatable to...

6. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) - Assessee company failed to provide bonafide explanation for inflated expenses claimed in revised return, contrary to audited...

7. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Merely because assessee claimed depreciation at 25% treating items to be plant, which claim was not acceptable to revenue, would not by itself...

8. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - assessee had sold a plot of land in respect of which deduction u/s 54B claimed - withdrawal of deduction u/s 54B - merely because the assessee...

9. Merely because assessee had claimed expenditure which was not accepted or not acceptable to Revenue that by itself would not attract a penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - AT

10. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - wrong claim of set off loss - explanation was not found false - no iota of evidence of concealment of any fact relating to particulars of income...

11. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income...

12. Assessee followed joint venture model for sharing revenue with collaborators as per franchise agreement. Assessee recorded all revenues, incurred expenditure, and shared...

13. Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 35 - AO has not brought out his case as to why penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act...

14. This case deals with the levy of penalties u/ss 271AAA and 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act in relation to various additions made to the assessee's income based on seized...

15. The assessee claimed deduction for compensation paid to farmers for acquiring mining rights, which was an allowable expenditure. The Assessing Officer allowed the...