Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The Tribunal had observed that ...

Tribunal Rules No Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Punjab Government Undertaking's Omission, No Benefit Gained.

May 17, 2016

Case Laws Income Tax HC

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The Tribunal had observed that by not adding back the amount, no one had been benefitted as the assessee is an undertaking of Government of Punjab - No penalty - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The Tribunal had observed that ...

Tribunal Rules No Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Punjab Government Undertaking's Omission, No Benefit Gained.

May 17, 2016

Case Laws Income Tax HC

You may also like:

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...

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...

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...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - Non-compliance with a notice issued u/s 142(1) - The Tribunal noted that in a previous round of proceedings, a penalty under section 271(1)(b) of...

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...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal deleted the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with a notice issued u/s 142(1) during reassessment proceedings....

The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) concerning the correct classification of income. The Assessing Officer treated the income as 'income...

Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for two types of additions: (1) the addition made u/s 50C on the difference between stamp duty value and sale...

The Assessing Officer (AO) consciously deleted irrelevant portions from the show cause notice, mentioning only the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income....

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...

Section 271(1)(c) penalty was held invalid due to improper issuance of notice, as no proceedings were pending when the notice was issued on 19.12.2019. Section 271A...

The ITAT Mumbai ruled on penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for estimation of income on bogus purchases. The tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied on additions made on an...

The assessee had conceded the compensation income to be included as income from other sources. However, upon judicial examination, the compensation was found to be...

The ITAT Mumbai addressed two key issues in the case. Firstly, regarding the penalty u/s 271(1)(c), the tribunal held that the absence of a tick mark on the notice did...

Quick Updates: