Search: penalty u/s 271

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 217(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai91 Delhi83 Bangalore27 Hyderabad25 Raipur23 Jaipur21 Chennai14 Pune8 Cuttack7 Surat6 Rajkot4 Dehradun3 Panaji3 Patna3 Ahmedabad2 Indore2 Allahabad2 Kolkata1

Key Topics

Section 271C5 Section 1444 Penalty3 Section 1472 Section 271(1)(c)2 Addition to Income2

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), DEHRADUN vs. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER EDUCATION, NANITAL

In the result, all the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 18/DDN/2020[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: The Hon'Ble Itat. 3. That The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Haldwani Be Set Aside That Of The Ao Be Restored.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma, Addl. CIT DR

Section 201Section 271Section 271C

1,30,77,320/- and Rs.36,71,920/- for the A.Ys. 2014- 15; 2015-16; 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively. Therefore, the assessee was found to be in default as per section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act. Penalty proceedings u/s 271C of the Act were also initiated against the assessee for above defaults. During the course

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), DEHRADUN vs. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER EDUCATION, NANITAL

JASPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(2), DEHRADUN

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), DEHRADUN vs. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER EDUCATION, NANITAL

JASPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(2), DEHRADUN

JASPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD1(1)(2) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN