ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, vacating penalty under ...

Assessee Successfully Challenges Section 271AA Penalty, Tribunal Finds Merit in Argument Over Record Valuation Discrepancies

April 5, 2025

Case Laws Income Tax AT

ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, vacating penalty under section 271AA. The tribunal found prima facie merit in the assessee's plea regarding inapplicability of the statutory provision, noting the section was amended w.e.f. 01.07.2012 while the referenced records predated this amendment. The tribunal emphasized that penalty imposition is not automatic and requires discretionary exercise by the Assessing Officer. The assessee's explanation regarding valuation differences due to insurance and freight on capital goods was deemed plausible. Consequently, the penalty was dropped, recognizing the lack of existing obligations at the time of record preparation and the need for fair, objective statutory discretion.

View Source

← Previous Next →

ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, vacating penalty under ...

Assessee Successfully Challenges Section 271AA Penalty, Tribunal Finds Merit in Argument Over Record Valuation Discrepancies

April 5, 2025

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Penalty u/s 270A - allegation of misreporting as per section 270A(9) - Penalty @200% in respect of excess claim of depreciation - The tribunal found that the...

The Appellate Tribunal found that the penalty was initiated u/s. 271DA instead of u/s. 271D, which led to confusion and violated the assessee's right to a fair hearing....

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessee did not disclose non-eligibility...

Time limit to pass assessment u/s. 92CA(3) - Transfer pricing adjustments - After thorough consideration of the statutory provisions and legal arguments presented by...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the levy of penalty u/s 270A. The Assessing Officer (AO) imposed the penalty u/s 270A(9)(a) for misrepresentation of facts and...

The case involves penalty imposition u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with statutory notices issued u/ss 143(2) and 142(1). Assessee explained non-compliance due to a...

The ITAT Mumbai addressed two key issues in the case. Firstly, regarding the penalty u/s 271(1)(c), the tribunal held that the absence of a tick mark on the notice did...

Penalty levied u/s 274 read with Section 270A - assessee computed tax on disallowed depreciation amount at maximum marginal rate and levied 200% penalty on payable tax -...

The case involved a dispute over a refund claim u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act. The Appellate Tribunal held that the time limitation for filing the refund claim did...

Addition of cash deposits u/s 68 - abnormal sales reported by the assessee during demonetized period - The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's argument that the...

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...

Penalty proceedings u/s 270A - Applicable rate of penalty - The Appellate Tribunal noted that while the penalty notice cited under-reporting of income, the AO imposed...

Rejection of central sale made by the assessee - once the Tribunal has recorded the finding that the documents, as required by it, was not placed by the assessee and no...

The assessee had not obtained and furnished the Audit Report from the Accountant within the due date. The Tribunal held that the levy of penalty u/s 271B is not...

The case involved a challenge to penalty orders u/ss 271D and 271E before the Appellate Tribunal. The issue revolved around the reassessment proceedings being quashed,...

Quick Updates: