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

Penalty for Wrong Tax Claim Deleted: Section 271(1)(c) Error Deemed Bona Fide, Not Inaccurate Income Reporting.

January 31, 2022

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - disallowance of expenses - Proof of bonafied error - there was wrong claim in the return of income filed by the assessee which cannot partake the characteristics of furnishing in-accurate particular of income. Therefore, we delete the levy of penalty considering it as bona fide error - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

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

Penalty for Wrong Tax Claim Deleted: Section 271(1)(c) Error Deemed Bona Fide, Not Inaccurate Income Reporting.

January 31, 2022

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed despite the assessee withdrawing the exemption claim u/s 10(38) for Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of penny stocks and offering...

The assessee failed to file the original return of income, and the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings for underreporting income. The assessee's authorized...

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...

Penalty for non deduction of tax at source - bona fide belief proved - penalty set aside - AT

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The Revenue argued that the assessee's actions constituted furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealing income. However, the High...

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...

Difference between assessed income and returned income arose due to inadvertent error in taking opening written down value (WDV) at book value instead of WDV under...

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 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...

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessee did not disclose non-eligibility...

The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) concerning the correct classification of income. The Assessing Officer treated the income as 'income...

Exemption u/s 11 - claiming benefit of accumulation u/s 11(2) over deemed income u/s 11(3) - non application of income - the assessee should not be eligible to claim...

Remission of tax and penalty – Whether non-registration is a bona fide error u/s 41(1) of Gujarat VAT Act – all contentions of the petitioner rejected - HC

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - not entitled for the deduction U/s 54 - claim deduction allowed U/s 54F - once, the assessee has explained the reasons for making a wrong claim...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The Revenue may or may not agree with this understanding of law of the assessee but the fact that there can be a bona fide view to that effect...

Quick Updates: