Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
201 to 220 of 97820 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty u/s 271(1) (c) - period of limitation - treatment of lease rent income - in the revised return, assessee claimed the same as income from house property to claim 30% standard deduction - AO treated the income of the assessee as income from business and initiated penalty proceedings - ITAT found that the penalty order was indeed unsustainable as it was passed beyond the prescribed time limit under section 275. Moreover, the ITAT emphasized that the mere rejection of a claim by the Revenue does not automatically warrant penalty imposition unless there is evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars.
Penalty u/s 271(1) (c) - period of limitation - treatment of lease rent income - in the revised return, assessee claimed the same as income from house property to claim 30% standard deduction - AO treated the income of the assessee as income from business and initiated penalty proceedings - ITAT found that the penalty order was indeed unsustainable as it was passed beyond the prescribed time limit under section 275. Moreover, the ITAT emphasized that the mere rejection of a claim by the Revenue does not automatically warrant penalty imposition unless there is evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
