![Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) would not attract When Assessee makes an Ineligible Claim: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/No-Penalty-Taxscan.jpg "Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) would not attract When Assessee makes an Ineligible Claim: ITAT [Read Order]")
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...
![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]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/First-Appeal-ITAT-Taxscan.jpg "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]")
![No Penalty when Income of Assessee is determined on an Estimate Basis: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/No-Penalty-TaxScan.jpg "No Penalty when Income of Assessee is determined on an Estimate Basis: ITAT [Read Order]")
![ITAT confirms Penalty since Assessee failed to Prove Genuineness of Cash Deposits [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Cash-Transaction-Limit.jpg "ITAT confirms Penalty since Assessee failed to Prove Genuineness of Cash Deposits [Read Order]")
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...
![Voluntary Disclosure in all cases can’t absolve the Assessee from Penal Liabilities: Bombay HC [Read Judgment]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Bombay-High-Court-2-Tax-Scan.jpg "Voluntary Disclosure in all cases can’t absolve the Assessee from Penal Liabilities: Bombay HC [Read Judgment]")
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...
![Making of a Claim which is not Sustainable in Law would not render Penal Liability: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ITAT-Ahmedabad.jpg "Making of a Claim which is not Sustainable in Law would not render Penal Liability: ITAT [Read Order]")
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 the scheme...
Voluntary Withdrawal of Rebate Claim would not amount to Concealment of particulars or Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars: Madras HC [Read Judgment]
The Madras High Court, while deleting penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, observed that voluntary withdrawal of rebate claim would not amount to concealment of particulars or...
![Voluntary Withdrawal of Rebate Claim would not amount to Concealment of particulars or Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars: Madras HC [Read Judgment]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Madras-High-Court-Tax-Scan-1.jpg "Voluntary Withdrawal of Rebate Claim would not amount to Concealment of particulars or Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars: Madras HC [Read Judgment]")
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is not Leviable when a Bonafide Claim of the Assessee gets Rejected: ITAT [Read Order]
The Mumbai bench of the ITAT, in M/s. Buildbyte.com v. ACIT, held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act cannot be levied in a case where the assessee made a bonafide claim and the...
No Penalty when Assessee made a Claim under Bona fide belief based on Judicial Precedence: ITAT [Read Order]
A division bench of the delhi Tribunal in DCIT v. American Express India Pvt. Ltd, held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not leviable when Assessee made a claim...