S. 271(1)(c): Penalty -Concealment-Concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars -Failure to specify exact charge -Penalty not sustainable. [. 68]
Girdharilal Motilal Agrawal v. ITO (2025) 128 ITR 309 (Nagpur)(Trib.).S. 271(1)(c): Penalty -Concealment-Concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars -Failure to specify exact charge -Penalty not sustainable. [. 68]
Girdharilal Motilal Agrawal v. ITO (2025) 128 ITR 309 (Nagpur)(Trib.).S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty -Concealment-Not specifying the Charge-Cash deposits treated as unexplained under section 68 for want of documentary evidence -Explanation found bona fide -Penalty order not specifying applicable limb -Penalty was deleted.[S.274]
Girdharilal Motilal Agrawal v. ITO [2025] 128 ITR 309 (Nagpur)(Trib)S. 270A: Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Bona fide belief regarding taxability -Reasonable cause-Voluntary offer of income during assessment/reassessment -Penalty not leviable. (S. 271(1)(c))]
IBM Canada Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2025) 128 ITR 656 (Bang.)(Trib.).S. 270A: Penalty for underreporting and misreporting of income -Non-specification of limb under section 270A-No penalty u/s 270A is leviable.[S.270A(9), 274]
DCIT v. Chakradhar Contractors and Engineers (P.) Ltd. (2025) 128 ITR 331 (Pune)(Trib.)S. 268A: Appeal -Instructions-Circulars -Monetary limits-Departmental appeal -Low tax effect -CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024 -Exception relating to bogus penny stock transactions not applicable where assessee claimed business loss and not short-term capital loss -Revenue’s appeal dismissed. (S.28(i), 45, 68, 143(3), 147, 148, 153A, 253)
Dy. CIT v. Satya Prakash Gupta (2025) 128 ITR 1 (Delhi) (Trib).S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Issue already examined during assessment -Proceedings initiated on basis of audit objection -Fresh issues beyond limitation -Revision invalid on legal and merits. [S. 143(3), 147, 148]
Vaneet Gupta v. ITO (2025) 128 ITR 352 (Chd.)(Trib.).S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Twin conditions of “erroneous” and “prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue” mandatory -Revision on payment of bonus to director quashed. [S. 40A(2)(b)]
Western India Cashew Co. (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 128 ITR 712 (Chennai)(Trib.).S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Partnership firm -Remuneration to partner -Minor typographical error in partnership deed -Revision not justified-Delay in filing of appeal was condoned. [S.40(b), 253(5), 254(1)]
Ajar Amar Steels v. PCIT (2025) 128 ITR 323 (Chd) (Trib.).S. 255: Appellate Tribunal -Procedure -Functions-No prohibition requiring a Special Bench as a rule to stay its hands when a similar/identical issue is pending before the High Court-Special Bench can proceed to hear and decide the appeal in accordance with law. [S. 14A,158A, 250]
J. P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA v. JCIT (2025) 128 ITR 291 [SB] (Mum)(Trib.)S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Additional evidence -Revenue produced additional evidence -Matter was remanded to the file of CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. [68, 69C, 80IB, 148]
ITO v. A. K. Exports (2028) 128 ITR 572 (Chd)(Trib)