Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

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
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

Penalty 271(1)(C) in case of loss

anil goenka

In course of Scrutiny ACIT added some expenses & issued penalty notice u/s 271(1)(C). The Ld CIT(A) allow partly. For the confirming part the ACIT was to impose penalty u/s 271(1)(C)

Total income as calculated by ACIT under section 143(3) is loss and order  U/s 250/143(3) computation is also for loss. Till date the assessee has not utilized the full B/f Loss as claim in the Return.

If the assessee do not set off b/f loss amounting to confirming disallowance  is he get benefit u/s 271(1)(C)

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) may not apply where additions are ad hoc, estimated, or genuinely disputed-appeal recommended. Levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) hinges on the nature and merit of additions: ad hoc or estimated disallowances, genuinely disputed claims partly allowed on appeal, prima facie allowability, prior allowance, or bona fide mistakes ordinarily preclude penalty; merits and arguability remain determinative despite retrospective amendments, and taxpayers should pursue appellate remedies while noting carried forward losses generally must be set off. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Shailesh Doshi on Dec 30, 2013

It is immaterial whether b/f loss is set-off till date. You have not specified the nature of addition. If the expenses are disallowed on ad-hoc or estimated basis by ACIT and if the said disallowance is partially confirmed by CIT (A), no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) would be attracted. There are several judgments which clearly stipulate that no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) would be attracted on ad-hoc or estimated additions. 

DEV KUMAR KOTHARI on Jan 1, 2014

Mere disallowance of expenses itself is not a suffecient ground to levy penalty u/s 271.1.c.

As part of expenses ahve beenallowed by the CIT(A), the matter is contentious on which difference of opinion exists. So penalty is not leviable.

The nature of expenses and evidence should be to establsih pramafacie allowability of the case.If similar expenses have been allowed  fully in past (even in order u/s 143.1, the claim is established and a disallowance cannot be ground for penalty.

Even a bonafide mistake can be a ground not to impose penalty - see cases of Reliance Petrolium and PWC.

Even after amendment of s.271.1.c and some judgments of SC holdign that amendment is retrospective,and penalty can be levied in case of loss, the merits of claim and arguablable status will absolve from levy of penalty.

It would be better to file appeal against order of CIT(A) to seek further relief. In case revenue has filed an appeal, then assessee can file appeal by way of Cross Objections without any fees for ITAT.

Eligible B/f losses have to be set off, there is no legal option not to set off losses except in case of some capital gains.

+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues