Assessee has claimed the expenses of foreign travelling of both ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Imposed Due to Debatable Foreign Travel Expenses of Married Directors.

July 4, 2016

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Assessee has claimed the expenses of foreign travelling of both the directors who are husband and wife - Allowability of said expense is a debatable issue - penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can not be imposed

View Source

← Previous Next →

Assessee has claimed the expenses of foreign travelling of both ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Imposed Due to Debatable Foreign Travel Expenses of Married Directors.

July 4, 2016

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – the penalty imposed for disallowing claim of expenditure on foreign education and foreign travelling cannot be upheld - AT

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of expenses of foreign Travel expenses and inter city travel expenses - Revenue has not rejected the explanation of the...

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

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 u/s 271(1)(c) - TP Adjustment - it is a debatable issue whether reimbursement of expenses qualifies as FTS and there are various decisions which have held that...

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

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...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income - adjustment made u/s 92CA - penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) on the adjustment made u/s 92CA is not...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition on account of Transfer Pricing adjustment relating to payment of commission - it is evident that these are debatable issues - In any...

The ITAT held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not imposable on the assessee. The assessee had voluntarily paid tax on income from sale of shares three years prior to...

Penalty being 300% by invoking Section 271(1)(c) - return was revised before completion of assessment - Revenue is not justified in imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - HC

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

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - When the matter travelled to the Tribunal, the explanation which was given by the assessee and accepted by the CIT(A) was once again examined by...

Quick Updates: