Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights August 2016 Year 2016 This

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c)- additions u/s 68 - the contention of the ...

Income Tax

August 9, 2016

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c)- additions u/s 68 - the contention of the assessee cannot be straightway rejected that such error may occur due to software problem - AT

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on addition made u/s 68 - the assessee has given sufficient explanation though not found satisfactory by AO - No merit in levying penalty.

  2. Disallowance on account of loss on error trade - due to human error in punching the wrong scrip code, or punching of wrong quantity or in punching buy order in place of...

  3. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Addition u/s 68 - Head changed from income under “PGBP” (as shown by the assessee) to addition U/s 68 - That there was some tax sought to be...

  4. Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - penalty cannot be levied where a bonafide claim of the assessee was rejected by the tax department. - AT

  5. Deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Issues on basis of which ALP shown by the assessee has been rejected are debatable - No penalty - AT

  6. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The calibre and expertise of the assessee has little or nothing to do with the inadvertent error. - SC

  7. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - absence of due care does not mean that the assessee is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income -...

  8. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) deleted – the act of the assessee was bonafide even though the assessee may have failed to substantiate its claim that the amount was capital receipt - HC

  9. Addition made u/s 68 - availability of opening capital balance cannot be discounted altogether - it may not be proper to altogether reject the claim of savings from past...

  10. Refund on CGST and IGST - denial only on the ground that his claim got consolidated under one head of SGST - petitioner's specific case is that due to error and new...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates