Home Highlights April 2013 Year 2013 This

You may also like:

1. Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - Addition of LTCG - Assessing Officer while recording satisfaction has invoked both the charges of section 271(1)(c) - ambiguity and...

2. Penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) - satisfaction relates to Section 271AAA - satisfaction of the AO qua a wrong section for the purposes of penalty of strict nature is...

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

4. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied by the Assessing Officer solely based on the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission withdrawing immunity from penalty and...

5. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non recording of satisfaction - When satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of IT Act is recorded by the AO in...

6. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - CIT(A) has given direction to the Assessing Officer to levy penalty equivalent to 100% tax under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere estimate of...

7. 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...

8. 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...

9. The case involved a dispute over penalty imposition u/ss 271(1)(c) versus 271(1B) for additions related to estimated income from share trading transactions. The...

10. Levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - since no specific satisfaction has been recorded by the Ld. Assessing Officer either in the body of the assessment order or in the show...

11. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - AO has not applied his mind before initiating the penalty proceedings rather borrowed his satisfaction from the “tax...

12. Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - assessee had failed to provide full submissions - penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT Act deserves to be...

13. Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The Revenue argued that the assessee's actions constituted furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealing income. However, the High...

14. The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It was questioned whether a precise charge was brought against the assessee and if the...

15. 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...