![Delay in Filing Audit Report due to Dispute Between Director of Company is Mere Technical Breach and not Malafide Intention: ITAT Deletes Penalty u/s 271 B of Income Tax Act [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Delay-Filling-Audit-Report-Dispute-Director-of-company-Technical-breach-taxscan.jpg "Delay in Filing Audit Report due to Dispute Between Director of Company is Mere Technical Breach and not Malafide Intention: ITAT Deletes Penalty u/s 271 B of Income Tax Act [Read Order]")
Delay in Filing Audit Report due to Dispute Between Director of Company is Mere Technical Breach and not Malafide Intention: ITAT Deletes Penalty u/s 271 B of Income Tax Act [Read Order]
The Chennai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the Tax Audit Report was made available to Assessing Officer before completion of...
![Non-filing of the Audit report along with Return of Income is a Procedural Omission and cant be claimed as an Exception: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Non-filing-of-the-Audit-report-Return-of-Income-is-a-Procedural-Omission-Audit-report-Return-of-Income-ITAT-taxscan.jpg "Non-filing of the Audit report along with Return of Income is a Procedural Omission and cant be claimed as an Exception: ITAT [Read Order]")
![Auditor Inadvertently Shown Wrong Disallowance Sum u/s 43B of Income Tax Act in Audit Report uploaded on Income Tax Portal: ITAT directs re-adjudication [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Auditor-Wrong-Disallowance-Sum-Income-Tax-Act-Audit-Report-income-tax-taxscan.jpg "Auditor Inadvertently Shown Wrong Disallowance Sum u/s 43B of Income Tax Act in Audit Report uploaded on Income Tax Portal: ITAT directs re-adjudication [Read Order]")
Demand of Service Tax Based on Audit Report of IOCL and Income Tax Department’s Information from Form 26AS is not Valid: CESTAT [Read Order]
The Kolkata bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal( CESTAT) has held that the demand for service tax based on the audit report of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd(IOCL) which is a...
![Demand of Service Tax Based on Audit Report of IOCL and Income Tax Department’s Information from Form 26AS is not Valid: CESTAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Demand-Service-Tax-Based-Audit-Report-of-IOCL-Income-Tax-Departments-information-CESTAT-service-tax-audit-report-income-tax-income-tax-department-Form-26AS-is-not-Valid-valid-taxscan.jpg "Demand of Service Tax Based on Audit Report of IOCL and Income Tax Department’s Information from Form 26AS is not Valid: CESTAT [Read Order]")
Late Filing of Audit Report due to Sufficient Cause u/s 273B of IT Act: ITAT deletes Penalty [Read Order]
The Amritsar bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) deleted the penalty imposed on late filing of audit reports. Tarlok Singh, the appellant assessee appealed against the order passed...
![Late Filing of Audit Report due to Sufficient Cause u/s 273B of IT Act: ITAT deletes Penalty [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Late-Filing-of-Audit-Report-Sufficient-Cause-Late-Filing-Audit-Report-Audit-Report-due-to-Sufficient-Cause-taxscan.jpg "Late Filing of Audit Report due to Sufficient Cause u/s 273B of IT Act: ITAT deletes Penalty [Read Order]")
Exemption u/s 11 should not be Denied Merely on Account of Delay in Furnishing the Audit Report in Form No. 10B: ITAT [Read Order]
The Ahmedabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act 1961 should not be denied merely on account of delay in furnishing the...
![Exemption u/s 11 should not be Denied Merely on Account of Delay in Furnishing the Audit Report in Form No. 10B: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Exemption-Delay-Furnishing-the-Audit-Report-Audit-Report-Form-No.-10B-ITAT-Taxscan.jpg "Exemption u/s 11 should not be Denied Merely on Account of Delay in Furnishing the Audit Report in Form No. 10B: ITAT [Read Order]")
Audit Report not Filed within Stipulated Time Limit as Books not Given to Qualified CA:ITAT Upholds Penalty u/s 271B [Read Order]
The Pune Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has upheld the penalty under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act 1961 because the audit report was not filed within the stipulated time limit as...
![Audit Report not Filed within Stipulated Time Limit as Books not Given to Qualified CA:ITAT Upholds Penalty u/s 271B [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Audit-Report-Stipulated-Time-Limit-Time-Limit-not-Filed-within-Stipulated-Time-Limit-Books-not-Given-to-Qualified-CA-CA-Books-Qualified-CA-ITAT-Penalty-taxscan.jpg "Audit Report not Filed within Stipulated Time Limit as Books not Given to Qualified CA:ITAT Upholds Penalty u/s 271B [Read Order]")
![ITAT Upholds addition made on Mismatch in Sales Turnover Report in Audit Report and ITR [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/ITAT-Upholds-addition-made-on-Mismatch-ITAT-Sales-Turnover-report-Audit-Report-ITR-Mismatch-in-Sales-Turnover-report-in-Audit-Report-and-ITR-Mismatch-in-Sales-Turnover-report-Taxscan.jpg "ITAT Upholds addition made on Mismatch in Sales Turnover Report in Audit Report and ITR [Read Order]")
Delay of One Day in Filing Audit Report Due to Technical Glitches of Income Tax Portal: ITAT sets aside Penalty u/s 271B [Read Order]
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jaipur Bench, has recently, on finding that the delay of one day in filing audit report was due to technical glitches on the Income Tax Portal, set aside the...
![Delay of One Day in Filing Audit Report Due to Technical Glitches of Income Tax Portal: ITAT sets aside Penalty u/s 271B [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/ITAT-sets-aside-Penalty-Delay-of-One-Day-in-Filing-Audit-Report-Penalty-ITAT-Filing-Audit-Report-Audit-Report-Technical-Glitches-of-Income-Tax-Portal-Income-Tax-Portal-Income-Tax-taxscan.jpg "Delay of One Day in Filing Audit Report Due to Technical Glitches of Income Tax Portal: ITAT sets aside Penalty u/s 271B [Read Order]")