Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The attempt to blame the Chartered ...

Income Tax

March 25, 2019

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The attempt to blame the Chartered Accountant cannot result in the assessee's exoneration and claimed in absolute terms. In the circumstances, the penalty was rightly imposed. - Decision of ITAT and HC confirmed by dismissing SLP

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The attempt to blame the Chartered ...

Income Tax

March 25, 2019

You may also like:

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that:- Wrongful claim of depreciation - The attempts made by the assessee are indicative of frivolous nature of claim - penalty confirmed - AT

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 -...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable to be imposed only where the assessee has concealed its particulars of income or furnished...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Merely because assessee claimed depreciation at 25% treating items to be plant, which claim was not acceptable to revenue, would not by itself...

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

Penalty u/s 271 (1)(C) - purchasing the shares at higher price - The explanation is also accepted by the Tribunal that any attempt to purchase the shares in such bulk...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - furnished wrong particulars of its income in terms of profits u/s 115JB - Computation of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) - levy of penalty confirmed - AT

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 u/s 271(1)(c) – assessee has bonafide belief in making the claim that gain arising out of sale of agricultural land is exempt from tax - no penalty - AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – In the garb of the bona fide claim an assessee cannot escape levy of penalty - Onus was not on the AO to prove the negative - AT

Quick Updates: