Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
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 assessee. - Referring to legal precedents, the ITAT highlighted that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can only be levied if there is concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, which must be determined with reference to the returned income. - As there was no discrepancy between the returned and assessed income, the tribunal instructed the A.O. to delete the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c).
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 assessee. - Referring to legal precedents, the ITAT highlighted that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can only be levied if there is concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, which must be determined with reference to the returned income. - As there was no discrepancy between the returned and assessed income, the tribunal instructed the A.O. to delete the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
