The ITAT considered levy of penalty u/s 271B for a default ...

Tax penalty under section 271B deleted by Appellate Tribunal due to genuine inadvertent mistake in filing tax audit report on time.

Case Laws Income Tax

June 20, 2024

The ITAT considered levy of penalty u/s 271B for a default related to Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB. The appellant obtained the audit report on time but inadvertently submitted wrong information in the ITR. Tax authorities rejected this explanation, alleging non-compliance with u/s 44AB. However, the auditor confirmed preparing the audit report timely. The ITAT found the penalty unjust as the audit report was obtained within the deadline, and the mistake was due to selecting the wrong column in the ITR. Consequently, the penalty u/s 271B was deemed inapplicable, and the appellant's appeal was allowed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The ITAT considered levy of penalty u/s 271B for a default ...

Tax penalty under section 271B deleted by Appellate Tribunal due to genuine inadvertent mistake in filing tax audit report on time.

Case Laws Income Tax

June 20, 2024

You may also like:

The CIT(A) partly allowed and restricted the addition on account of commission expenses at 0.25% as compared to 2% adopted by the Assessing Officer. The coordinate bench...

The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal u/s 249(4)(b) due to non-payment of advance tax. The assessee did not respond to the notice u/s 142(1) to clarify tax payment....

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case where disallowance of Gratuity u/s 43B was made due to a discrepancy in classification in the Income Tax Return and tax audit...

Central Government, creation of the State Benches of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT)

Income–tax (10th Amendment) Rules, 2018 - Form of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal

POWERS OF INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. - Article

The Adjudicating Authority had the power to recall its earlier order, which contained factual mistakes, and pass a corrected order regarding the return of the Corporate...

Rectification of mistake u/s 154 - Though there is a remedy to revise the return but if the assessee could not revised its return of income within the period prescribed,...

Gross violation of CBEC instructions and the precedential value of CESTAT decisions. The Revenue filed an appeal before the first Appellate Authority without specifying...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of condonation of delay in filing appeals, which exceeded 400 days, due to unexplained cash deposits and protective additions...

Difference between assessed income and returned income arose due to inadvertent error in taking opening written down value (WDV) at book value instead of WDV under...

Adjustment of excess service tax paid with subsequent service tax liability - case of Revenue is that Rule 6 (3) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 do not provide for such...

The case pertains to the refund claims of service tax paid under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) due to a misconception or mistake of law. The tribunal held that...

The assessee, a foreign company, earned network transportation fees from its Indian associated enterprise (AE), Damco India Private Limited (DIPL). The Assessing Officer...

The petitioner was denied benefit under the MEIS Scheme due to an inadvertent mistake where the relevant entry was left blank by the employees of the Customs Broker. The...

Quick Updates: