Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com   

Income Tax Case Laws - Section: 271F

Home Case Index Income Tax Sections List
Filter:
Cases for Section: 271F
Showing 1 to 8 of 8 Records
 

2015 (10) TMI 1308 - ITAT HYDERABAD

Mr. Upender Kumar (Ind) Versus DCIT, Central Circle-7, Hyderabad

Penalty under section 271F and 271(1)(b) - non-compliance of notices under section 153C as well as 142(1) and 143(2) - Held that - CIT(A) dismissed the appeals of the assessee exparte without giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard and since the assessee was not well during the course of penalty proceedings, he has not got an effective opportunity to offer his explanation for noncompliance to the notices issued under section 153C .....


2011 (9) TMI 445 - ITAT DELHI

RS. Investment Versus Income-tax Officer, Ward 30(2), New Delhi

Penalty under 271F - No taxable income in last four A/Y - Assessee filed affidavit that original returns have been filed - Held THat - section 271F are applicable when there is a violation of non-filing the return when notices u/s 153 read with section 153A are issued, Revenue could not prove beyond doubt that returns have not been furnished, thus penalty under 271F cannot be levied.


2008 (5) TMI 353 - ITAT AGRA

Sanjay Agarwal Alias Sanjay S. Agarwal. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax.

Delay In Filing Return


2007 (12) TMI 186 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus JAYASAKTHI BENEFIT FUND LTD.

Deposits in cash exceeding the prescribed limit - explanation offered with reference to the deposits received by the assessee has been accepted by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), and also by the Tribunal - There is no material available on record for us to suspect or reject the transaction as not bona fide - Tribunal is justified in deleting the penalty imposed under section 271D by holding that the assessee did not contravene the provisions of section 269SS


2007 (9) TMI 27 - HIGH COURT , JHARKHAND

OMEC ENGINEERS Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Penalty -Alleged that assessee had received more than permissible amount u/s 269SS in cash and accordingly penalty imposed - Held that there is genuine reason for accepting the cash and accordingly penalty set aside


2007 (6) TMI 198 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus VISWAPRIYA FINANCIAL SERVICES AND SECURITIES LTD.

Non deduction of TDS assessee was under bona fide belief that tax is not required to be deducted - Tribunal has given a finding that there is a reasonable cause for not deducting the tax at source - Hence, the Tribunal is justified in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271C - concurrent finding given by both the authorities below are based on valid materials and evidence - whenever there is a concurrent finding by the authorities below, no interference should be called for by the High Court


2007 (6) TMI 144 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus LS LAKSHMANASWAMY

Penalty AO imposed penalty on assessee u/s 271B of the Act for not providing any sufficient cause for belated filing of the audit report but rejected by the tribunal on the ground that there is reasonable cause for filing the report belatedly Tribunal order affirmed by the HC


2004 (4) TMI 262 - ITAT CALCUTTA-B

Mrs. Manju Kataruka. Versus Income Tax Officer.

Penalty - For failure to furnish return of income


 
   
 
 
1
 

what is new what is new

Latest

Featured

Experts

Subscription

More Options

Communication




|| About us || Contact us || Feed Back || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map || ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Website