When Quantum Addition deleted, Consequent Penalty can’t Survive: ITAT [Read Order]

The Delhi bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that when the quantum addition is deleted by the appellate authorities, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961...

Bonafide Human Errors should be demonstrated with Circumstantial Evidence: ITAT upholds Penalty [Read Order]

While dismissing an appeal filed by Swift Knit Pvt.Ltd, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Ahmedabad bench has held that in order to avoid penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, the assessee...

Assessee can’t be penalized for a Bonafide Mistake committed by Chartered Accountant: ITAT [Read Order]

The Delhi bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) has held that no penalty can be initiated against the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for a bonafide...

No Penalty when Addition is made by Invoking Deeming Provisions: ITAT [Read Order]

The Delhi bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be leviable when addition is made by invoking deeming provisions. The...

Making a Wrong Claim would not attract Penalty: Delhi HC [Read Judgment]

The Delhi High Court recently held that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act cannot be automatically levied when the assessee makes a claim of write off which consequently reduces the tax...

No Penalty u/s 271(1)( c ) If Assessee had acted in a Bonafide Manner: ITAT [Read Order]

The Delhi bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) ruled that the department should not impose the Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act if the assessee had acted in a...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can’t be Imposed when Income is determined on Estimate Basis: ITAT [Read Order]

In ACIT vs. Eagle Theatres, the Delhi bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be imposed when income is determined on...

ITAT Grants Relief to Shah Rukh Khan: Deletes Penalty on his Bona Fide belief of Non-Taxability of Dubai Villa [Read Order]

The Mumbai bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recently granted relief to Bollywood Film Actor Shah Rukh Khan by removing the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax...

Offering Income under a Wrong Head would not attract Penalty: ITAT [Read Order]

In ACIT vs. M/s. Sane & Doshi Enterprises, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) held taxability of an item of income under a wrong particular head should not result in levy of penalty...

Quantification of Penalty depends on Addition made to Income of Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]

While hearing the case of Kamlesh P. Modi and Rohit P. Modi, Ahmedabad bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled that quantification of penalty is depended upon addition made to the income of the...

Mere Voluntary Surrender of Income without Disclosing Its’ Source would not avoid Penalty: Delhi HC [Read Order]

A division bench of the Delhi High Court, last day held that mere voluntary surrender of income without disclosing its source cannot rescue assessee from facing penal consequences under the Income Tax Act. The assessee,...

No Penalty when Assessee co-operated in Re-opening Proceedings and Paid Tax: ITAT [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow recently in the case of Pankaj Kumar Gupta v. Income Tax Officer ruled that penalty is not leviable when the assessee co-operated in re-opening proceedings and paid tax. The...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) would not attract When Assessee makes an Ineligible Claim: ITAT [Read Order]

The ITAT bench comprising of Accountant Member T. S. Kapoor and Judicial Member Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would not attract when assessee makes an...

Stay can be allowed for Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) if the same is levied as a Result of Enhancement of Income in First Appeal: ITAT [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal recently ruled that the stay can be allowed for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 if the same is levied as a result of enhancement of...

No Penalty when Income of Assessee is determined on an Estimate Basis: ITAT [Read Order]

Rajkot Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) declared that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961 cannot be levied when the assessment made only on the basis of estimated profit. In the present...

No Penalty If determination of Arm’s Length Price has not lead to any Transfer Pricing Adjustment, with no effect on income of the assessee: ITAT [Read Order]

Delhi bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recently held that if determination of arm’s length price has not lead to any transfer pricing adjustment and with no effect on income of the assessee, no...

ITAT confirms Penalty since Assessee failed to Prove Genuineness of Cash Deposits [Read Order]

While dismissing the assessees appeal the Ahmedabad bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal confirmed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 imposed on assessee on ground that the assessee failed to...

Voluntary Disclosure in all cases can’t absolve the Assessee from Penal Liabilities: Bombay HC [Read Judgment]

The Bombay High Court while allowing a reference application in favour of the Revenue, held that voluntary disclosure in all cases cannot absolve the assessee from penal liabilities under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax...

Making of a Claim which is not Sustainable in Law would not render Penal Liability: ITAT [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal recently held that mere making of a claim which is not sustainable in law would not amount to furnishing of incorrect particulars for the purpose of levying penalty under section...

No Penalty If Assessee made Bonafide Mistake in Returns and Revised the same Later: ITAT [Read Order]

The Delhi bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 would not attract  when the asessee made a bonafide mistakes while the computation of...

No Penalty If ALP was determined as per section 92C in Good Faith and with Due Diligence: ITAT Delhi [Read Order]

A division bench of the Delhi ITAT, last week held that penalty under section 271(1)(c ) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be levied if the Arm’s Length Price (ALP) was determined as per...