Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - difference of income in the return filed ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Imposed Due to Lack of Evidence Beyond Section 132(4) Statement in Tax Discrepancy Case.

August 4, 2019

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - difference of income in the return filed u/s.139(1) and 153A - there was no such allegation that of assessee was found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or any income based on any entry in any books of account or other documents or transactions, either in the assessment or penalty or the CIT (A) order - no penalty 271 (1) (c) r.w. the explanation 5A merely on the basis of the statement u/s 132(4)

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - difference of income in the return filed ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Imposed Due to Lack of Evidence Beyond Section 132(4) Statement in Tax Discrepancy Case.

August 4, 2019

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Smuggling - illegal importation of the seized gold - Confiscation of the gold and Indian currency - The Tribunal found no evidence linking the seized Indian currency to...

Levy of penalties u/ss 122 and 129 of CGST/SGST Acts - expiry of e-way bill - mens rea in penalty imposition. Technically, violation of law by petitioner in transporting...

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...

Penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission u/s 271(1)(c) - The petitioner argued against the penalty, citing lack of mens rea and the absence of evidence showing...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - when the assessee company had been assessed to tax under the deeming provisions of Sec. 115JB of the Act, therefore, on the basis of our...

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 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) - proof of contravention of provisions provided under explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) - On reference to the provisions of explanation 5A to...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied on additional income voluntarily offered in the statement recorded u/s 132(4). However, no reference was made to corroborative...

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

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...

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...

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...

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...

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...

Quick Updates: