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. 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.

No Penalty For Failure To Deduct Tax At Source If Assessee

WebProvided  that no penalty shall be levied in respect of income referred to in section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D to the extent such … WebSection 271C of Income Tax Act. Section 271C of Income Tax Act lays down the law relating to the penalty which should be imposed by the Income Tax Department for failure to … phone won\u0027t recognize headphones

Faceless penalty proceedings u.s. 271.1.c In many cases penalty ...

WebApr 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 271C for delayed remittance, payment, or deposit of the TDS. The court stated, asserting the CBDT’s Circular No. 551 dated January 23, 1998. The assessee was not required to pay … WebFeb 9, 2024 · Our view is fully supported from the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of income tax vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, 380 ITR 550, wherein … WebMar 16, 2009 · 16 March 2009 Please note that penalty under both these sections can not be imposed at the same time. Difference between both these sections are as below: 1. … how do you spell providing