Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Penalty in dispute has been imposed is ...

Case Laws Income Tax

August 17, 2013

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Penalty in dispute has been imposed is purely on estimation basis and the Assessing Officer has not brought any material on record to establish any mala fide intention of the assessee to evade tax - no penalty - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Penalty in dispute has been imposed is ...

Case Laws Income Tax

August 17, 2013

You may also like:

The crux pertains to levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for alleged furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income regarding capital gains computation on sale...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - recording of specific finding or not? - In para 7 of the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer held that it is found to be a fit...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can be imposed for an ad-hoc disallowance of 20% of expenses made by the Assessing Officer....

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - assessee had failed to provide full submissions - penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT Act deserves to be...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of bogus purchases by applying the profit rate - Once there is no reason to disbelieve the sales made by the assessee and...

Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Addition of LTCG - Assessing Officer while recording satisfaction has invoked both the charges of section 271(1)(c) - ambiguity and...

Penalty u/s 270A was imposed by disallowing 30% of indexed cost of development expenses concerning Long Term Capital Gain offered by the assessee due to failure to...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - CIT(A) has given direction to the Assessing Officer to levy penalty equivalent to 100% tax under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere estimate of...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - estimation of income - bogus purchases - penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be levied where the addition is made on estimate basis - AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - a case of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income has not been made out against the assessee. - Though, similar disallowances were made by...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied by the Assessing Officer solely based on the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission withdrawing immunity from penalty and...

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...

Levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - since no specific satisfaction has been recorded by the Ld. Assessing Officer either in the body of the assessment order or in the show...

Levy of Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The ITAT ruled that since there was no variation between the returned and assessed income, there was no concealment of income by the...

The case involved a dispute over penalty imposition u/ss 271(1)(c) versus 271(1B) for additions related to estimated income from share trading transactions. The...

Quick Updates: