Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - expenditure of webhosting and misc. ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Warranted for Genuine but Rejected Taxpayer Claims on Web Hosting Expenses.

September 17, 2018

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - expenditure of webhosting and misc. expenditure for website development - when the assessee has come up with bonafide claim, even if it is not accepted, it would not per se tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars so as to attract the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c)

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - expenditure of webhosting and misc. ...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Warranted for Genuine but Rejected Taxpayer Claims on Web Hosting Expenses.

September 17, 2018

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

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

ITAT upheld penalties imposed under s.271(1)(c) against appellant firm for multiple violations. Unexplained cash credits in partners' capital accounts violated...

Penalty u/ s 271(1)(c) - Disallowance on account of personnel expenses, operative expenses and finance expenses - it a “mere disallowance” of an expense does not warrant...

The ITAT ruled that penalties under sections 271(1)(c) and 270A against the taxpayer were improper and directed their deletion. The tribunal held that merely making an...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - deduction claimed u/s 80IA - there being no factual basis for establishing that the expenses needed to be allocated and the expenses so...

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...

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....

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...

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

Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for two types of additions: (1) the addition made u/s 50C on the difference between stamp duty value and sale...

The preliminary assessment u/s 143(1) is limited to processing the return for arithmetical errors, incorrect expense claims, verifying audit reports, deductions, and...

The Assessing Officer (AO) consciously deleted irrelevant portions from the show cause notice, mentioning only the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income....

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...

This case deals with the levy of penalties u/ss 271AAA and 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act in relation to various additions made to the assessee's income based on seized...

Quick Updates: