Penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) - mere treatment of an amount as ...

Appellate Tribunal rules no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for taxpayer's revenue classification dispute with Assessing Officer.

October 27, 2022

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) - mere treatment of an amount as revenue (by the AO) instead of capital (by the taxpayer) - The rejection of such a claim by the Appellate Tribunal does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, thereby levying penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) - mere treatment of an amount as ...

Appellate Tribunal rules no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for taxpayer's revenue classification dispute with Assessing Officer.

October 27, 2022

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) concerning the correct classification of income. The Assessing Officer treated the income as 'income...

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...

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessee did not disclose non-eligibility...

The case involved a dispute over penalty imposition u/ss 271(1)(c) versus 271(1B) for additions related to estimated income from share trading transactions. The...

Section 271(1)(c) penalty was held invalid due to improper issuance of notice, as no proceedings were pending when the notice was issued on 19.12.2019. Section 271A...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal deleted the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) for non-compliance with a notice issued u/s 142(1) during reassessment proceedings....

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...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - Non-compliance with a notice issued u/s 142(1) - The Tribunal noted that in a previous round of proceedings, a penalty under section 271(1)(b) of...

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

Levy of Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The ITAT ruled that since there was no variation between the returned and assessed income, there was no concealment of income by the...

Levy of penalties under various sections - The Appellate Tribunal, in a consolidated order, addressed several appeals concerning penalties imposed under various sections...

Defective notice issued u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) for levying penalty. The key points are: The phrases "conceal" and "furnishing of inaccurate particulars" in...

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

The ITAT Mumbai ruled on penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for estimation of income on bogus purchases. The tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied on additions made on an...

Quick Updates: