Penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission u/s 271(1)(c) - The ...

Income Tax

April 5, 2024

Penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission u/s 271(1)(c) - The petitioner argued against the penalty, citing lack of mens rea and the absence of evidence showing awareness or receipt of any excess consideration. The court examined the disclosures made by the petitioner, discrepancies in stamp duty valuation, and the petitioner's explanation regarding ignorance of the sale deed executed by the Power of Attorney holder. Ultimately, the High Court found that the element of concealment was not established, especially considering the lack of independent evidence showing receipt of excess consideration. Consequently, the court set aside the penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission u/s 271(1)(c) - The ...

Income Tax

April 5, 2024

You may also like:

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

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

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

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) - Default by assessee - mens rea is not an essential element for imposing penalty for non compliance of notices issued by AO - penalty confirmed - AT

It was open for the Settlement Commission to impose penalty on the directors in addition to imposing penalty on the company, if there was material justifying imposition...

Power of settlement commission - Settlement Commission is within its powers to impose penalty on each of the Directors in addition to the imposition of penalty upon the...

Penalty u/s 271)1)(c) - penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income can neither be imposed nor sustained on enhancement of net profit rate based on an estimate

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

Where against main noticee/defaulter, the Settlement Commission has granted immunity from payment of any penalty, no penalty can be imposed upon other co-noticees - HC

Quick Updates: