No Penalty under GST on Firms for not Displaying GSTIN outside Offices: Punjab SGST
Addressing concerns, the Punjab State Goods and Services Tax (SGST) officials have provided reassurance to traders and industrialists, stating that...
![Non Service Tax Registration Due to Bonafide Belief of Exemption: CESTAT reduces Penalty u/s 77(1)(a) of Finance Act [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Non-Service-Tax-Registration-Service-Tax-Registration-Service-Tax-CESTAT-reduces-Penalty-CESTAT-Penalty-Finance-Act-taxscan.jpg "Non Service Tax Registration Due to Bonafide Belief of Exemption: CESTAT reduces Penalty u/s 77(1)(a) of Finance Act [Read Order]")
![NLU not conducting Business, exists solely for Legal Educational Purposes: ITAT quashes Penalty for Failure to Audit [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/NLU-ITAT-quashes-Penalty-for-Failure-to-Audit-Business-Legal-Educational-Purposes-ITAT-Penalty-Taxscan.jpg "NLU not conducting Business, exists solely for Legal Educational Purposes: ITAT quashes Penalty for Failure to Audit [Read Order]")
![Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not Leviable When no Inaccurate Particulars of Income are Furnished by the Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Penalty-Inaccurate-Particulars-of-Income-Inaccurate-Particulars-of-Income-are-Furnished-by-the-Assessee-Income-ITAT-taxscan.jpg "Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not Leviable When no Inaccurate Particulars of Income are Furnished by the Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]")
![No Penalty u/s 271D if Reasonable Cause shown by Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Penalty-Reasonable-Cause-shown-by-Assessee-ITAT-Assessee-Reasonable-Cause-Taxscan.jpg "No Penalty u/s 271D if Reasonable Cause shown by Assessee: ITAT [Read Order]")
Cash Payment of Defaulted EMI Instalment to Financier after Cheque Bounce is “Reasonable Cause”: ITAT deletes Penalty u/s 273B [Read Order]
The Chennai Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the penalty imposed under Section 273B of the Income Tax Act holding that the cash payment of defaulted EMI instalment to...
![Cash Payment of Defaulted EMI Instalment to Financier after Cheque Bounce is “Reasonable Cause”: ITAT deletes Penalty u/s 273B [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Cash-Payment-of-Defaulted-EMI-Instalment-to-Financier-Cheque-Bounce-is-Reasonable-Cause-ITAT-deletes-Penalty-us-273B-TAXSCAN.jpg "Cash Payment of Defaulted EMI Instalment to Financier after Cheque Bounce is “Reasonable Cause”: ITAT deletes Penalty u/s 273B [Read Order]")
ITAT deletes Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Unfair Representation During Liquidation Process [Read Order]
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) recently deleted the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, considering the unfair representation of the assessee during...
![ITAT deletes Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Unfair Representation During Liquidation Process [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/ITAT-Penalty-us-2711c-Unfair-Representation-During-Liquidation-Process-TAXSCAN.jpg "ITAT deletes Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Unfair Representation During Liquidation Process [Read Order]")
Failure to file Audit Report through a Qualified CA: ITAT upholds Penalty u/s 271B of Income Tax Act [Read Order]
The Pune Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently upheld a penalty under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the assessee had failed to file the audit report through a...
![Failure to file Audit Report through a Qualified CA: ITAT upholds Penalty u/s 271B of Income Tax Act [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Failure-to-file-Audit-Report-through-a-Qualified-CA-ITAT-upholds-Penalty-us-271B-of-Income-Tax-Act-TAXSCAN.jpg "Failure to file Audit Report through a Qualified CA: ITAT upholds Penalty u/s 271B of Income Tax Act [Read Order]")
TDS Late Fees u/s 234E Leviable only Prospectively, Not Before 01/06//2015: ITAT deletes Penalty [Read Order]
The Pune Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the penalty holding that the late fee under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act 1961 regarding Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) could...
![TDS Late Fees u/s 234E Leviable only Prospectively, Not Before 01/06//2015: ITAT deletes Penalty [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/TDS-Late-Fees-Leviable-Prospectively-ITAT-deletes-Penalty-Penalty-ITAT-Income-Tax-taxscan-.jpg "TDS Late Fees u/s 234E Leviable only Prospectively, Not Before 01/06//2015: ITAT deletes Penalty [Read Order]")
No Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of Income Tax Act for Failure to Sign on “Consent Letter” not Authorized by the Government: ITAT [Read Order]
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently held that no penalty should be levied under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for failure to sign a consent letter...
![No Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of Income Tax Act for Failure to Sign on “Consent Letter” not Authorized by the Government: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/No-penalty-us-2711b-of-Income-Tax-Act-for-failure-to-sign-on-Consent-Letter-authorized-by-the-Government-ITAT-TAXSCAN.jpg "No Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of Income Tax Act for Failure to Sign on “Consent Letter” not Authorized by the Government: ITAT [Read Order]")
Additional Income Disclosed Originated Out of Seized Material: ITAT Upholds Penalty Levied u/s 271(1)(c) [Read Order]
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Pune Bench, has recently, in an appeal filed before it, on finding the additional income disclosed and returned in ITR filed under Section 153A, to be...
![Additional Income Disclosed Originated Out of Seized Material: ITAT Upholds Penalty Levied u/s 271(1)(c) [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Additional-Income-Additional-Income-Disclosed-Originated-Out-of-Seized-Material-Seized-Material-ITAT-Penalty-ITAT-Upholds-Penalty-Taxscan.jpg "Additional Income Disclosed Originated Out of Seized Material: ITAT Upholds Penalty Levied u/s 271(1)(c) [Read Order]")