Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2016 (4) TMI 26 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal cancels penalty under Income-tax Act for assessee's full disclosure The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the imposition of a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act was not justified. The ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal cancels penalty under Income-tax Act for assessee's full disclosure

                          The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the imposition of a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act was not justified. The penalty was deleted as the assessee had disclosed all relevant facts, there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, and no loss to revenue occurred. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty should not be imposed for not filing a revised return when all details were disclosed, supporting its decision with relevant case law, including Supreme Court judgments.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for alleged concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars.
                          2. The legal implications of not filing a revised return after the approval of a demerger scheme by the High Court.
                          3. The relevance of full disclosure of facts and the bona fide intention of the assessee in penalty proceedings.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Imposition of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(c):
                          The sole ground raised by the assessee challenges the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 75 lacs under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, confirmed by the authorities below. The penalty was imposed on the basis that the assessee did not file a revised return after the demerger scheme was approved by the High Court, and continued to claim losses attributable to the resulting company.

                          2. Legal Implications of Not Filing a Revised Return:
                          The assessee contended that it had filed its return of income for AY 2006-07 declaring a loss of Rs. 6,44,82,042 without considering the effect of the demerger, as the scheme was not sanctioned by the High Court before the due date of filing the return. The assessee had disclosed all relevant facts and documents to the AO, including the pending demerger application. The AO, however, reduced the loss related to the demerger and converted the assessed loss into an income of Rs. 2,21,82,042, initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c).

                          3. Full Disclosure of Facts and Bona Fide Intention:
                          The assessee argued that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, as all relevant details about the demerger were disclosed to the department. It was also highlighted that the assessee did not claim any set-off of the losses in the subsequent year and paid the due taxes, demonstrating bona fide intention. The assessee's explanation for not filing the revised return was due to inadvertence and was supported by evidence.

                          Tribunal's Observations:
                          - The Tribunal observed that the assessee had filed all relevant documents, information, and events before the AO during the course of filing the return for AY 2006-07 and in AY 2007-08. The High Court's order approving the demerger scheme was also promptly filed with the AO.
                          - The allegation of concealment or inaccurate particulars was not established by any new fact, information, or inquiry. The adverse inference was drawn solely on the assessee's own record and the High Court's approval for the demerger scheme.
                          - The Tribunal noted that there was no loss to revenue as the assessee had not claimed any set-off of the losses in the subsequent year and had paid all due taxes.
                          - The Tribunal emphasized that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed for not filing a revised return when all relevant details were disclosed and there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars in the original return.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal held that the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not justified as the assessee had disclosed all relevant facts and there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The penalty was deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. The Tribunal relied on various judgments, including those of the Supreme Court, to support its decision that penalty should not be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so, especially in cases of technical or venial breaches.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found