The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of a penalty ...

Penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) upheld for unexplained trading cost difference. Assessee's explanation inconsistent. Penalty imposed.

Case Laws Income Tax

June 11, 2024

The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of a penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) and u/s 274 regarding unexplained differences in trading sales and purchase costs. The Tribunal found the notice u/s 274 not vague and upheld the penalty due to the inability of the assessee to substantiate accounts. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of strong reasons for selling goods below cost and the need for accurate valuation. The penalty was imposed based on inconsistencies in the assessee's claims and lack of transparency in accounts. The Tribunal emphasized the burden of proof on the assessee and the necessity to address all observations made by the assessing officer. The Tribunal allowed the appeal partially for statistical purposes.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of a penalty ...

Penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) upheld for unexplained trading cost difference. Assessee's explanation inconsistent. Penalty imposed.

Case Laws Income Tax

June 11, 2024

You may also like:

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

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...

The crux pertains to levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for alleged furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income regarding capital gains computation on sale...

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...

Section 271(1)(c) penalty was held invalid due to improper issuance of notice, as no proceedings were pending when the notice was issued on 19.12.2019. Section 271A...

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - failure to comply with the notices issued by the A.O u/s 142(1) - the non-compliance on the part of the assessee is due to the reason of...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Assessee filed return of income in response to notice u/s 148 - No difference between returned income and assessed income - Assessee voluntarily...

Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - non-compliance of the notice issued under Section 142(1) - if the assessee really had no connection with the Swiss Bank accounts,...

Non-filer assessee had taxable income but failed to file return u/s 139(1), later filed return in response to notice u/s 148 without considering section 50C provisions,...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(C) - Unexplained Expenditure on Stamp Duty and Registration Charges made out of Undisclosed Income - There was no dishonest intent of the assessee...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of excessive depreciation - cost of acquisition of wind mill - whether or not assessee is entitled to the benefit under proviso to...

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

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...

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...

Quick Updates: