Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition u/s 68 - Penalty has been ...

Case Laws Income Tax

June 4, 2021

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition u/s 68 - Penalty has been levied in a mechanical manner without application of mind. In our view, this is a serious mistake in the penalty order which is incurable at this stage - by restoring the penalty to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), the appellate authority can not cure the defect/mistake which has been committed by the AO in the penalty order passed under section 271(1)(c) - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition u/s 68 - Penalty has been ...

Case Laws Income Tax

June 4, 2021

You may also like:

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...

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

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - addition u/s 68 - the entire addition itself becomes debatable one. It is well settled proposition of law that the penalty u/s 271(1)(c)...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on addition made u/s 68 - the assessee has given sufficient explanation though not found satisfactory by AO - No merit in levying penalty.

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)(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)(c) - Addition u/s 68 - Head changed from income under “PGBP” (as shown by the assessee) to addition U/s 68 - That there was some tax sought to be...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - estimation of income - bogus purchases - penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be levied where the addition is made on estimate basis - AT

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 levied u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 35 - AO has not brought out his case as to why penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of bogus purchases by applying the profit rate - Once there is no reason to disbelieve the sales made by the assessee and...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - when we examine penalty levied on account of salary disallowance AO has merely made adhoc addition by way of guess work and the AO has not...

Quick Updates: