Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Claim of depreciation on leased ...

Penalty Imposed for Bogus Depreciation Claims on Leased Assets u/s 271(1)(c); Transactions Deemed Sham.

October 16, 2014

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Claim of depreciation on leased assets - The transactions entered into by the assessee were sham and bogus transactions which were intended to defeat the provisions of law - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Claim of depreciation on leased ...

Penalty Imposed for Bogus Depreciation Claims on Leased Assets u/s 271(1)(c); Transactions Deemed Sham.

October 16, 2014

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

No penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed on the assessee for disallowance of depreciation. The ITAT held that the assessee did not deliberately claim depreciation with an...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Claim of depreciation on financed leased assets - AO while disallowing the claim of depreciation has not considered the exclusion of the...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - bogus claim of deduction under Section 35CCA - penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was rightly imposed - HC

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) - Assessee company failed to provide bonafide explanation for inflated expenses claimed in revised return, contrary to audited...

Claim of depreciation in respect of assets allegedly leased - financing transactions - assessee purchased assets and leased back to the same company claiming 100% depreciation - HC

To impose penalty u/s 271(1)(c), willful concealment is not an essential ingredient - HC

This case deals with the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, imposed for disallowance of losses on forex derivatives treated as speculative losses and...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of bogus purchases by applying the profit rate - Once there is no reason to disbelieve the sales made by the assessee and...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) can be imposed for an ad-hoc disallowance of 20% of expenses made by the Assessing Officer....

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed for excess deduction claimed u/s 10B. The assessee furnished all relevant facts for computing total income, and provided detailed...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - recording of specific finding or not? - In para 7 of the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer held that it is found to be a fit...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Making an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere making of a...

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - disallowance of depreciation - he explanation given by the assessee for the claim of depreciation is neither bona fide nor...

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 35 - AO has not brought out his case as to why penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - estimation of income - bogus purchases - penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be levied where the addition is made on estimate basis - AT

Quick Updates: