The ITAT Mumbai upheld the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for bogus LTCG confirmed. Revised income declaration not voluntary. No exemption u/s 10(38).

Case Laws Income Tax

May 30, 2024

The ITAT Mumbai upheld the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for bogus LTCG. Exemption u/s 10(38) denied as revised income declaration was not voluntary but in response to u/s 148 notice. Citing MAK Data case, voluntary disclosure doesn't prevent penal proceedings. Assessee failed to provide evidence for share transaction genuineness. Additional income declared only after u/s 148 notice, not voluntarily. No merit in argument that penalty cannot be imposed as returned and assessed income are same. Penalty upheld as bogus LTCG was claimed exempt initially. Assessee's appeal dismissed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The ITAT Mumbai upheld the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for bogus LTCG confirmed. Revised income declaration not voluntary. No exemption u/s 10(38).

Case Laws Income Tax

May 30, 2024

You may also like:

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

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - it cannot be said that the surrender of income was voluntary - assessee had no intention to declare its true income - penalty confirmed - SC

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - surrender was not voluntary - assessee failed to explain the difference between the assessed income and returned income - penalty confirmed - AT

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

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed despite the assessee withdrawing the exemption claim u/s 10(38) for Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of penny stocks and offering...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of bogus purchases by applying the profit rate - Once there is no reason to disbelieve the sales made by the assessee and...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - estimation of income - bogus purchases - penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be levied where the addition is made on estimate basis - AT

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - difference in original return of income and revised return - Had it been the intention of the assessee to make a full and true disclosure...

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...

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) - Addition u/s 68 - Head changed from income under “PGBP” (as shown by the assessee) to addition U/s 68 - That there was some tax sought to be...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - If AO accepted the revised return, there was no question of making inadmissible claim of deduction u/s 10B in such revised return. In fact,...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - error in filing return - Once the assessee is served with a notice of scrutiny assessment, corrections to the declaration of his income, would...

Quick Updates: