Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowances in the quantum assessment ...

Tribunal Deletes Some Penalties, Upholds Others; Unexplained Investments Remanded for Reconsideration.

March 7, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowances in the quantum assessment order - whether any concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars proved? - Tribunal directs deletion of penalty concerning disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) as the quantum appeal resulted in deletion of the addition. - Penalty in relation to unexplained investment and capital expenditure is remanded to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for reconsideration post-quantum appeal decision. - Tribunal upholds penalty on foreign traveling expenses and commission payments, citing lack of evidence to establish business purpose or compliance with tax regulations.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowances in the quantum assessment ...

Tribunal Deletes Some Penalties, Upholds Others; Unexplained Investments Remanded for Reconsideration.

March 7, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The Appellate Tribunal considered the legality of additions based on a diary seized from a third party. The Tribunal held that the presumption u/s 132(4A) of the Act...

Key legal issues and the Tribunal's holdings: Agricultural land sold by assessee situated beyond municipal limits cannot be treated as capital asset u/s 2(14). Addition...

The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act for share application money received from various individuals. The company failed to prove the...

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...

The assessee's contentions were upheld by the Tribunal regarding various additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal ruled that the RTGS transfer from the...

Addition u/s. 69A - unexplained cash deposits in the bank account - The Tribunal found the explanation provided by the assessee regarding the sale consideration for real...

Additions against Over-invoicing of Purchases - The Tribunal found that the AO's selective reliance on pieces of evidence without considering the entirety of the...

Deduction us/ 80P(2) - income received on investment made with co-operative banks - The Tribunal interpreted section 80P(2)(d) and (e) to determine the eligibility of...

The Appellate Tribunal addressed the addition u/s 69 concerning unexplained investment. The issue stemmed from an agreement displaying the individual name of the...

Rejection of declared transaction value under Valuation Rule 12, re-determination of value under Valuation Rules 4-9. Commissioner followed Rule 9, adopted actual values...

The assessing officer (AO) exceeded jurisdiction by reclassifying income as fees for technical services (FTS) instead of royalty, contrary to the limited remand order...

ITAT examined three key issues regarding property transactions and unexplained funds. On unexplained money under s.69A, the Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s deletion of AO's...

The ITAT held: Long term capital gain was to be computed allowing deduction for indexed cost of acquisition and exemption u/s 54B. Addition u/s 68 for unexplained...

Unexplained money u/s 69A or investment u/s 69 - Once an AO finds that an investment has been made, he has to examine the Assessee's explanation as to the source of that...

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...

Quick Updates: