Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Merely because assessee claimed ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Automatic for Disputed 25% Depreciation Claim on Plant Items.

January 31, 2019

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Merely because assessee claimed depreciation at 25% treating items to be plant, which claim was not acceptable to revenue, would not by itself attract penalty.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Merely because assessee claimed ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Automatic for Disputed 25% Depreciation Claim on Plant Items.

January 31, 2019

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

No penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed on the assessee for disallowance of depreciation. The ITAT held that the assessee did not deliberately claim depreciation with an...

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) - Making an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere making of a...

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - disallowance of depreciation - he explanation given by the assessee for the claim of depreciation is neither bona fide nor...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that:- Wrongful claim of depreciation - The attempts made by the assessee are indicative of frivolous nature of claim - penalty confirmed - AT

The assessee is entitled to claim additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) on electrical items forming part of plant and machinery, even if not engaged in manufacture or...

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

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed for denying deduction u/s 80DD for a disabled person with over 80% disability. The assessee, a retired individual, had submitted...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Claim of depreciation on financed leased assets - AO while disallowing the claim of depreciation has not considered the exclusion of the...

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...

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 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...

Quick Updates: