Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - quantum of addition has been confirmed ...

Case Laws Income Tax

April 17, 2019

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - quantum of addition has been confirmed by the High Court - mere rejection of a claim otherwise made bonafide and on arguable legal contentions would not give rise to penalty proceedings

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - quantum of addition has been confirmed ...

Case Laws Income Tax

April 17, 2019

You may also like:

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...

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...

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...

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 levied u/ss 271(1)(c) and 271AAA for unexplained investment and addition made by adopting net profit as per the books of accounts at 12.85% on the suppressed...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non recording of satisfaction - When satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of IT Act is recorded by the AO in...

MAT is paid, additions were made to regular income, penalty not levied – 115JB, 271(1)(c)

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - property dealer - addition on account of cash retained - The facts of the case may justify the addition in the quantum case, but the parameters...

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 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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Any addition/disallowances made during the quantum proceedings does not automatically justify the levy of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) -...

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

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) - As the penalty proceedings are distinct and independent to the quantum proceedings, in our considered view, penalty cannot be levied merely on...

Quick Updates: