Search: penalty u/s 271

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 194A(3)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore33 Mumbai25 Delhi16 Hyderabad8 Chandigarh7 Jaipur5 Jabalpur5 Chennai4 Ahmedabad3 Pune3 Kolkata2 Raipur2 Dehradun2 Cuttack1 Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)5 Section 405 TDS3 Section 194A2 Addition to Income2

MANOJ S. GUGALE,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1327/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1327/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Manoj S. Gugale 652, Shantisadan, Topkhana, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ahmednagar …. Pan: Adzpg9595N Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 3, Ahmednagar

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei

Section 271(1)(c)Section 271B

u/s 271(1)(c) had erred in not appreciating the following important facts: a) The appellant had offered additional income, which constitutes a voluntary and bonafide act. b) In compliance of the disclosure, the appellant had filed the revised statement incorporating the additional income during the course of assessment proceedings also claimed the TDS voluntarily, which was remained

MANOJ S. GUGALE,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

ANJALI PUSHKAR HINGANE,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, NASHIK

MANOJ S. GUGALE,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

ANJALI PUSHKAR HINGANE,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, NASHIK

RBL BANK LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,