Home Highlights September 2014 Year 2014 This

You may also like:

1. This case deals with the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, imposed for disallowance of losses on forex derivatives treated as speculative losses and...

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

3. 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....

4. 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...

5. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed for excess deduction claimed u/s 10B. The assessee furnished all relevant facts for computing total income, and provided detailed...

6. 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...

7. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - bogus claim of deduction under Section 35CCA - penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was rightly imposed - HC

8. To impose penalty u/s 271(1)(c), willful concealment is not an essential ingredient - HC

9. Levy of penalties u/ss 122 and 129 of CGST/SGST Acts - expiry of e-way bill - mens rea in penalty imposition. Technically, violation of law by petitioner in transporting...

10. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable to be imposed only where the assessee has concealed its particulars of income or furnished...

11. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 43B as well as disallowance export product development expenses - Just because the assessee...

12. Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(C) - deemed income being loss claimed and disallowed - The AO has also not specified the charge on which penalty is being levied - No penalty - AT

13. 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....

14. 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...

15. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Bogus purchases - we are of a strong conviction that in the absence of documentary evidence supporting the genuineness of the purchases claimed...