Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - demand has already been ...

NCLT Nullifies Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act; Assessing Officer Must Comply with Order.

June 13, 2023

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - demand has already been extinguished in the order passed NCLT - The only apprehension of the assessee perhaps is that the AO may not nullify the demand, since the Ld CIT(A) has observed that he is dismissing the appeal as infructuous. In our view, this apprehension is unfounded, since the AO should necessarily nullify the demand following the order passed by NCLT and not on the basis of appellate orders passed under the Income tax Act. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - demand has already been ...

NCLT Nullifies Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act; Assessing Officer Must Comply with Order.

June 13, 2023

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The assessee had conceded the compensation income to be included as income from other sources. However, upon judicial examination, the compensation was found to be...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - recording of specific finding or not? - In para 7 of the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer held that it is found to be a fit...

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

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - CIT(A) has given direction to the Assessing Officer to levy penalty equivalent to 100% tax under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere estimate of...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied by the Assessing Officer solely based on the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission withdrawing immunity from penalty and...

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 u/s 271(1)(c) was levied on additional income voluntarily offered in the statement recorded u/s 132(4). However, no reference was made to corroborative...

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)(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 levied u/s 271(1)(b) and / or 272A(1)(d) - assessee failed to comply notice under Section 142(1) - The assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) and not under...

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 levied u/s 271 (1) (c) - As the appellants had disclosed the income, after detection by the department and as per the terms of settlement, the assessing officer...

Levy of Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The ITAT ruled that since there was no variation between the returned and assessed income, there was no concealment of income by the...

Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Addition of LTCG - Assessing Officer while recording satisfaction has invoked both the charges of section 271(1)(c) - ambiguity and...

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...

Quick Updates: