AO and the CIT (A) are not on the same page for levy of penalty ...

Dispute Between AO and CIT(A) Over Penalty Imposition u/s 271(1)(c); Disallowance Doesn't Mean Automatic Penalty.

October 17, 2016

Case Laws Income Tax AT

AO and the CIT (A) are not on the same page for levy of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act. Further, mere disallowance of a claim will not automatically attract the levy of penalty - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

AO and the CIT (A) are not on the same page for levy of penalty ...

Dispute Between AO and CIT(A) Over Penalty Imposition u/s 271(1)(c); Disallowance Doesn't Mean Automatic Penalty.

October 17, 2016

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Whether levy of penalty u/S 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act is automatic – Imposition of penalty is not automatic. - HC

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...

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...

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) - Failure of the assessee to explain the source of cash deposit in the bank account - burden of proof - The ITAT acknowledged the...

Monetary limit for filing of appeal by revenue in case of penalty - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on bogus purchases - Quantum proceedings and penalty proceedings are...

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...

Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – mere admission of appeal by the High Court is sufficient to debar the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act - AT

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...

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

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - for such lump-sum disallowance out of wages on the basis of presumption, no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is leviable - AT

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - It cannot be said that assessee has concealed the particular income with the meaning of section 271(1)(c) of the Act or there is not deep...

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...

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...

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....

Quick Updates: