Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

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
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2024 (10) TMI 244

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s and circumstances of the case in upholding levy of penalty of Rs. 1,40,050/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 2. The Learned C.I.T (Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the case in not considering the action of the Assessing officer (A.O) in initiating penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, whereas the A.O vide notice issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act dated 14-03- 2016 has initiated penal ty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) for concealment of income as well as for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, thus the penal ty order passed is bad in law. 3. The Learned C.I.T. (Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and on facts an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s submitted by the assessee has dealt on the disputed issue and required the assessee to prove that the purchase transactions are genuine. In compliance the assessee has filed written submissions on various dates in support of the claim but the A.O. was not satisfied with the reply and supporting documents. Finally the A.O. has estimated profit element on non-genuine purchases @ 12.5% which works out to Rs. 11,33,097/-and assessed the total income of Rs. 15,85,460/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 14.03.2016. 3. Subsequently, the A.O. has initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, Since assessee has entered into bogus purchase transactions, the A.O relied on the findings in the scrutiny assessment and....