Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights May 2024 Year 2024 This

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Referring to a precedent set by the ...

Case Laws     Income Tax

May 2, 2024

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Referring to a precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Mittal, the Tribunal emphasized that when an assessee voluntarily discloses additional income to resolve tax disputes, such disclosure should be considered bona fide. - The Tribunal observed that the vouchers for the purchases were self-made and subsequently treated as bogus by the AO. It concluded that this situation mirrored the circumstances in the Suresh Chandra Mittal case, where penalties were canceled due to the assessee's bona fide explanation. Consequently, the Tribunal deleted the penalties imposed by the AO.

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. 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....

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. The case involved a dispute over penalty imposition u/ss 271(1)(c) versus 271(1B) for additions related to estimated income from share trading transactions. The...

  5. Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - non-compliance of notice issued u/s 142(1) - Referring to the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa, the...

  6. 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...

  7. Penalty u/s 271 AAB or u/s 271 (1)(c) - concealment on income - as per clause (2) of section 271AAB, no penalty under the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of...

  8. 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...

  9. Voluntary surrender of income by assessee cannot be considered concealment. AO failed to prove concealment, merely concluded voluntary surrender as concealment....

  10. Levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - since no specific satisfaction has been recorded by the Ld. Assessing Officer either in the body of the assessment order or in the show...

  11. Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - Non-compliance with a notice issued u/s 142(1) - The Tribunal noted that in a previous round of proceedings, a penalty under section 271(1)(b) of...

  12. Initiation of penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) - ndisclosed income as referred under sub-Section 1 of Section 271AAA - Impugned penalty proceeding has been initiated and...

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

  14. Penalty u/s 271AAA or 271(1)(c) - The penalties u/s 271(1)(c) and 271AAA are attracted in different situations and both are mutually exclusive. Having initiated the...

  15. Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - Scope of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of IT Act cannot be widened later to include within its scope such additions which were not...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates