Penalty u/s 271(c) was imposed on additions of 25% of ...

Penalty for Non-Verifiable Purchases Deleted; No Proof of Concealment or Inaccuracy in Income Found.

July 26, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(c) was imposed on additions of 25% of non-verifiable purchases debited to the trading account. The addition was made on estimation of total turnover after rejecting the books of accounts. Notices u/s 133(6) were issued to various purchase parties, but all were returned by the postal authority, and the assessee did not produce the parties to confirm the same. The lower authorities observed that the revenue did not establish that the assessee had concealed or submitted inaccurate particulars of income to attract Section 271(1)(c). The addition was admittedly made on an estimate basis. The ratio of the judgment in Parasamal Babulal Jain and various ITAT pronouncements covered the assessee's case. Since the addition was made on an estimate basis, the penalty was rightly deleted by the CIT(A). The ITAT found no illegality in the CIT(A)'s order and confirmed it, deciding against the revenue.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(c) was imposed on additions of 25% of ...

Penalty for Non-Verifiable Purchases Deleted; No Proof of Concealment or Inaccuracy in Income Found.

July 26, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The ITAT Mumbai ruled on penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for estimation of income on bogus purchases. The tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied on additions made on an...

In the case of 2024 (5) TMI 1132 before the ITAT Mumbai, the issue pertained to penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) concerning the estimation of income on bogus purchases....

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income was challenged. The Assessing Officer (AO) alleged that the assessee understated turnover and concealed income...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowed the assessee's appeal and directed the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act to be deleted. The Assessing Officer...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Bogus purchases - Assessing Officer has only estimated the Gross Profit on the alleged non-genuine purchases without there being any conclusive...

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...

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....

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

Undisclosed income surrendered during search must fall within the definition of undisclosed income for penalty u/s 271AAA to be justified. Assessing Officer must record...

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...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(l)(c) - it is a case where the hypothesis of there being a concealment of income and there not being concealment of income are equal - no penalty - AT

Penalty for concealment of income Under Section 271(1) (c) - Article

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...

Penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) - estimated rate of profit applied on the turnover of the assessee - in the case on hand the Assessing Officer has only estimated the Gross...

Quick Updates: