Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of transport expenses - ...

Penalty for Cash Payments on Transport Expenses Deemed Unjustified; Section 271(1)(c) Misapplied for Ad Hoc Disallowance.

September 8, 2021

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of transport expenses - payment made in cash - Just because the payments were made in cash cannot be a basis to doubt the genuineness of the expenditure. Since the disallowance are made on adhoc basis by applying the rate of 15%, holding the assessee liable to pay penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income cannot be held to be justified. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of transport expenses - ...

Penalty for Cash Payments on Transport Expenses Deemed Unjustified; Section 271(1)(c) Misapplied for Ad Hoc Disallowance.

September 8, 2021

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Mere disallowance of expenses u/s 40A(3) would not invite penalty for concealing or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Assessee disclosed all particulars...

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 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...

Ad-hoc disallowance of various expenses on the ground that said expenses incurred in cash and not further, supported by necessary bills and vouchers - once the Assessing...

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

Nature of expenses - Allowable expenses u/s 37(1) - Interest and late fee on TDS, Late payment & penalty charges, Interest on margin trading facility - There was no...

Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 24(b) was rejected as the assessee was incurring interest expenditure for redevelopment of the house, and the CIT(A) rightly...

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....

Onus on assessee to explain exorbitant increase in transport expenses and support with proper bills/vouchers, which assessee failed. Sample bills/vouchers not for...

The ITAT ruled on two issues: 1. Disallowance of Business Promotion Expenses: AO disallowed expenses for a get-together, citing lack of proof of business purpose. CIT(A)...

Disallowance u/s 37(1) - payments of expenditure by way of cash - Assessee has incurred 90% of expenses by way of cheque, meaning thereby, in case of business necessity...

Research and Development expenses (R&D Expenses) - Allowability of expenses u/s 35(2) - The expenses are not covered u/s 35(2) - The assessee has not claimed the same...

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...

ITAT upheld penalties imposed under s.271(1)(c) against appellant firm for multiple violations. Unexplained cash credits in partners' capital accounts violated...

Contravention of Sections 8(1) and 9(1)(f)(i) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - receiving foreign exchange payments in 1996-97 through fake export documents...

Quick Updates: