Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights January 2019 Year 2019 This

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - a mere claim in the return of income as ...

January 9, 2019

Case Laws     Income Tax     AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - a mere claim in the return of income as agricultural land cannot be considered to be furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealing any part of income.

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Explanation is bonafide is, we find, supported by the fact that during assessment proceedings the assessee, realizing his mistake even before...

  2. Non-filer assessee had taxable income but failed to file return u/s 139(1), later filed return in response to notice u/s 148 without considering section 50C provisions,...

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

  4. 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...

  5. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Gain on sale of land - Bona-fine belief that the land under consideration was an agricultural land only - No mala-fide intention could be...

  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) - period of limitation - treatment of lease rent income - in the revised return, assessee claimed the same as income from house property to claim...

  8. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income was declared in survey u/s 133A - date of filing of return u/s 139(1) had not expired - The fact of “concealment of income” and...

  9. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed despite the assessee withdrawing the exemption claim u/s 10(38) for Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of penny stocks and offering...

  10. 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...

  11. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Penalty order did not specify the particular limb under which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is levied. AO has not specified that penalty is either levied...

  12. 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...

  13. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income...

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

  15. 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...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates