Income tax penalty u/s 271c
WebNov 19, 2015 · Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, mandates that a specified percentage of Tax is required to be deducted by the payer at the time of making certain payments to the payee. … WebMar 16, 2009 · 1. Penalty u/s 221 is imposed by AO while by Joint Comm. u/s 271C. 2. Section 221 comes into play only when there is a defaul in payment while 271C comes …
Income tax penalty u/s 271c
Did you know?
WebApr 11, 2024 · It was held that on true interpretation of Sec 271C, there shall not be any penalty leviable u/s 271C on mere delay in remittance of the TDS after deducting the … Web1. confirming penalty of Rs.1,81,00,765 u/s. 271C of I. T. Act, 1961. 2. confirming the above penalty on the ground that the eventhough the appellant had claimed that the parties to whom payments were made had paid the taxes whereever applicable in their individual capacity, the appellant had not submitted any documents in support of the same.
Web1 day ago · The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and a notice under section 143(2) was served on the assessee on 22.09.2016. The Assessing Officer(AO) passed assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2.1 The AO has levied penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the penalty order the Assessee had filed appeal … WebApr 10, 2024 · On 02.06.2003, Income Tax Officer (ITO) vide order under Section 201(1A) of the Act, 1961 levied penal interest of Rs. 4,97,920/for the period of delay in remittance of TDS. On 09.10.2003, the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax issued a show cause notice proposing to levy penalty under Section 271C of the amount equal to TDS.
WebApr 10, 2024 · The Supreme Court Monday held that no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Income Tax Act over mere belated remittance of the tax deducted at … WebApr 15, 2024 · The Supreme Court has ruled that no penalty is leviable under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on mere delay in remittance of the tax deducted at source …
Web3 hours ago · 6. Thus, from the above, it is evident that non-specification of the limb of the notice would render the penalty proceedings invalid. Accordingly, respectfully following the precedent, we set-aside the orders of the authorities below holding that notice u/s 271 (1) (c) is omnibus notice, thus defective which goes to the root of the matter.
http://kb.icai.org/pdfs/PDFFile5b4f18e43e2db4.51472745.pdf easy cookie cutter recipeWebSection 271C (1): (a) deduct the whole or any part of the tax as required by or under the provisions of Chapter XVII-B; or. (b) pay the whole or any part of the tax as required by or … cups charityWebApr 15, 2024 · The Supreme Court has ruled that no penalty is leviable under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on mere delay in remittance of the tax deducted at source (TDS) after the same has been deducted by the assessee. The bench of Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar observed that the relevant words used in Section easy cookie decorating icingWebNote : No penalty is imposable for any failure under sections 271 (1) ( b), 271A, 271AA, 271B, 271BA, 271BB, 271C, 271CA, 271D, 271E, 271F, 271FA, 271FAB , 271FB, 271G, 271GA , 271GB , 271H, 271-I , 272A (1) ( c) or ( d ), 272A (2), 272AA (1), 272B, 272BB (1), 272BB (1A), 272BBB (1), 273 (1) (b), 273 (2) (b) and 273 (2) (c) if the person or … cups chicaWebApr 12, 2024 · Even the CBDT has decided to impose no penalty under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act for non-deduction of TDS, and no penalty is contemplated under Section … cups checklistWebApr 10, 2024 · The Hon’ble Supreme Court opined that on true interpretation of Section 271C, there shall not be any penalty u/s 271C on mere delay in remittance of the TDS after … easy cookie in a mug recipeWebApr 10, 2024 · New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday held that no penalty shall be leviable under section 271C of the Income Tax Act over mere belated remittance of the tax … cups chester