Income tax penalty u/s 271c
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 (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 WebNote : 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 assessee …
Income tax penalty u/s 271c
Did you know?
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 source (TDS) after its deduction by the ... The penalty under section 271C is applicable under the following conditions – 1. The person fails to deduct, the whole or part of, tax at source (i.e. TDS). 2. The person fails to pay, the whole or part of, Dividend Distribution … See more In case of default, the penalty under section 271Cis leviable to the extent of an amount equal to TDS not deducted / not paid. See more Q 1. What is Chapter XVIIB? Ans:Chapter XVII of the Income Tax Act covers provisions relating to ‘Collection and recovery of tax’. Part B of Chapter XVII (i.e. Chapter XVIIB) covers … See more
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 … WebNote : 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 …
WebNov 11, 2014 · However, the AO did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee and levied penalty U/S 271C of the Act vide order dt. 18th Aug., 2010. Being aggrieved, the … WebApr 12, 2024 · Supreme Court Held. The Supreme Court held that section 271C (1) (a) is applicable in case of a failure on the part of the assessee to “deduct” the whole or any part …
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 12, 2024 · Supreme Court Held. The Supreme Court held that section 271C (1) (a) is applicable in case of a failure on the part of the assessee to “deduct” the whole or any part of the tax as required under the provisions of the Act. The words used in Section 271C (1) (a) are very clear, and the relevant words used are “fails to deduct.”. citrus county master gardenersWebApr 12, 2024 · The Supreme Court (SC) of India has held that mere belated TDS remittance won’t attract a penalty under section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. M/s US Technologies, the appellant challenged the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in confirming the levy of interest/penalty under … dicks going going gone monroevilleWebApr 11, 2024 · The Supreme Court in this case was considering whether the appellant was liable for penalty u/s 271C even though there was mere delay in payment as the provisions of Section 271C dealt with penalty for failure to deduct the tax and not delayed payment of tax. ... 271C and 273B of Income-tax Act,1961: Counsel(s): Counsels : Dowload Pdf File ... citrus county mandatory evacuationWebApr 13, 2024 · The Supreme Court in this case was considering whether the appellant was liable for penalty u/s 271C even though there was mere delay in payment as the provisions of Section 271C dealt with penalty for failure to deduct the tax and not delayed payment of tax. The court accepting the arguments of the Appellant’s AR that the penal provisions ... dicks going going gone locationsWebApr 11, 2024 · 11 April 2024 3:15 AM GMT. 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 ... dicks gold scorecard benefitsWebSep 7, 2024 · 3.Penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of Rs.4,60,000 was levied vide order dated 26/04/2024. 4.On appeal CIT (A) deleted the Penalty on the sole ground taken regarding … dicks going going gone olatheWebAug 3, 2024 · The plain reading of section 271 (1) (c) of Income Tax act 1961 clearly states as follows “Concealment of particulars of income or fringe benefits or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or fringe benefits” and levies penalty of minimum 100% as a fine and maximum 300% of tax sought to be evaded in addition to tax payable. dicks going going gone olathe ks