Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - denial of deduction under section ...

Income Tax

April 5, 2021

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - denial of deduction under section 80IB(10) - Just because the claim for this A.Y. 2009–10 was rejected, the penalty cannot be imposed considering the fact that the assessee has submitted all the relevant information during the assessment proceedings and also all the relevant information relating to this claim was available on record. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - denial of deduction under section ...

Income Tax

April 5, 2021

You may also like:

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

Penalty u/s 271(1) - addition of wrong claim u/s 80IB made by assessee in the return & surrendered during scrutiny proceedings - such claim is solely based on the report...

Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – the penalty imposed for disallowing claim of expenditure on foreign education and foreign travelling cannot be upheld - AT

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 being 300% by invoking Section 271(1)(c) - return was revised before completion of assessment - Revenue is not justified in imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - HC

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

Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) or penalty u/s.271AAA - The provisions of Section 271AAA(3) of the Act specifically excludes the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the...

Refund of claim - Claim filed beyond period of 1 year - Export - Notification No. 17/2009 - all conditions are mandatory - refund claim filed beyond one year rejected - AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - recording of satisfaction - penalty initiated u/s 143(3) order for concealment of particulars of income - penalty imposed for furnishing of...

Denial of claim of deduction u/s 80IB - the “industrial undertaking” should not be formed by “splitting up” or “re-construction” of a business already in existence - AT

Quick Updates: