Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - TP Adjustment - it is a debatable issue ...

Case Laws Income Tax

October 17, 2022

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - TP Adjustment - it is a debatable issue whether reimbursement of expenses qualifies as FTS and there are various decisions which have held that reimbursement of expenses does not qualify as FTS. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that no penalty can be levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on account of treating reimbursement of expenses as FTS. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - TP Adjustment - it is a debatable issue ...

Case Laws Income Tax

October 17, 2022

You may also like:

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition on account of Transfer Pricing adjustment relating to payment of commission - it is evident that these are debatable issues - In any...

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 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) - Transfer pricing adjustment - Debatable issue - Base Erosion Theory - Reading a particular paragraph of the observations of the AO’s order...

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...

TP adjustment on account of reimbursement of seafarer expenses - Revenue has only doubted the genuineness of the alleged reimbursement of expenses made by the assessee...

Deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Issues on basis of which ALP shown by the assessee has been rejected are debatable - No penalty - AT

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...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - As a matter of fact the notice issued u/s 274 read with section 271 of the Act itself was ambiguous as it did not make it clear as to under which...

Penalty u/ s 271(1)(c) - Disallowance on account of personnel expenses, operative expenses and finance expenses - it a “mere disallowance” of an expense does not warrant...

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....

The Assessing Officer (AO) consciously deleted irrelevant portions from the show cause notice, mentioning only the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income....

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - The notice u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(l)(c) of the Act were issued without striking off the irrelevant portion of the limb...

Quick Updates: