Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - assessee did not comply with the notice ...

No penalty u/s 271(1)(b) due to lack of evidence against assessee's ill-health claim in non-compliance case.

September 19, 2020

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - assessee did not comply with the notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act requiring the assessee to furnish certain information - Neither the AO nor the CIT(A) has brought on record anything against the evidences furnished by the assessee regarding his ill-health. We are of the considered view that this is not a fit case for imposition of penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - assessee did not comply with the notice ...

No penalty u/s 271(1)(b) due to lack of evidence against assessee's ill-health claim in non-compliance case.

September 19, 2020

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Validity of penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - non-compliance - The assessee has shown sufficient cause for non-compliance, moreover, such non-compliance was done by...

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...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that every non-compliance with a notice u/s 142(1) gives a separate cause of action for levying penalty u/s 271(1)(b)....

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non-compliance of notice issues - if the quantum proceedings itself are declared to be bad in law and quashed , then any non compliance on the...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set aside the assessment order for the assessee and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment after...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal deleted the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with a notice issued u/s 142(1) during reassessment proceedings....

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

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...

The case involves penalty imposition u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with statutory notices issued u/ss 143(2) and 142(1). Assessee explained non-compliance due to a...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) - assessee failed to give reasons for non-compliance of statutory notice u/s. 142(1) - till the disposal of appeal by the CIT(A) the assessee...

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - failure to comply with the notices issued by the A.O u/s 142(1) - the non-compliance on the part of the assessee is due to the reason of...

HC ruled penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E require explicit satisfaction to be recorded by Assessing Officer during reassessment. Mere recording of...

Penalty u/s.271(1)(b) - no compliance to notice u/s 142(1) - The AO levied the penalty for non-compliance of notice dated 13.06.2016, however, there is no reference of...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - default of non-compliance of the statutory notice issued under section 142(1) r.w.s. 129 - where the assessment order was finally passed u/s...

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...

Quick Updates: