Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

The ITAT Mumbai considered a case involving a penalty u/s ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not justified due to defective notice u/s 274. Certain expenditures were disallowed.

Case Laws Income Tax

May 27, 2024

The ITAT Mumbai considered a case involving a penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal found the notice issued u/s 274 to be defective and emphasized the importance of clear-cut findings on whether there was concealment or inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal held that confusion in recording satisfaction for penalty initiation renders the penalty unsustainable. It rejected the argument that finality of additions made by the AO warrants penalty, citing the principle that incorrect claims do not equate to inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal concluded that rejection of a claim does not automatically lead to penalty imposition. Based on legal tests and higher court decisions, the Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty, stating that the decision was neither perverse nor illegal. As a result, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The ITAT Mumbai considered a case involving a penalty u/s ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not justified due to defective notice u/s 274. Certain expenditures were disallowed.

Case Laws Income Tax

May 27, 2024

You may also like:

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - Emphasizing the principles outlined by the Karnataka High Court, the Tribunal reaffirmed the importance of...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective notice - non specification of charge - Assessing Officer has issued a vague and defective notice under section 274 r.w.s....

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Mandation of specification of charge - It is clear that for the AO to assume jurisdiction u/s 271(1)(c), proper notice is necessary and the...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - non specification of charge - AO has miserably failed to specify in the notice issued under section 274 read with...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Non specification of charge - defective notice - as the A.O had clearly failed to discharge his statutory obligation of fairly putting the...

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) - Defective notice u/s 274 - non specification of charge - new plea before the authorities below - In this case in hand, there is no such plea...

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...

The assessee challenged the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) for short credit of sale consideration received from the sale of copyrights and cable rights. The issue...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective notice u/s 274 - non specification of clear charge - the Tribunal held that that the penalty imposed by the A.O is not valid due to the...

The ITAT Surat held that the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to a defective notice and estimation of income on bogus purchases. The notice u/s 274 was...

Penalty u/s 271AAA OR 271(1)(c) - issuance of a lawful notice u/s 274 - notice issued under wrong section - Reference in the second sentence is only to the making of the...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - in the assessment order, AO has made it clear that penalty proceedings are initiated separately for furnishing...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective notice u/s 274 - The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for such notices to clearly delineate the charge against the assessee, allowing...

Quick Updates: