ambit of it being a MAT
Company, Section 115J of the Act applies and, under that section, such an
assessee-Company was required to prepare ... what is incorporated in Section 115J is
only Schedule VI and not Section 205 or Section 350 or Section 355. This
was the view
investments ought to be
excluded at the time of working of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.
Rule 8D.
6. Without prejudice to the above ... assessee against such income has made the disallowance of
Rs. 2,41,355/- u/s 14 A of the Act .
4.3 The assessee during
Valsad , upholding the penalty of Rs.1,07,355/-levied
u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ... plea
of the assessee and imposed a penalty of Rs.1,07,355/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act
read with explanation
instant case the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.3,31,37,355/- u/s
80IB in the return of income being the amount ... claim for deduction u/s 80IB to
Rs.82,84,339/- in place of Rs.3,31,37,355/- and according to the
assessee
instant
case the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.3,31,37,355/-u/s 80IB in
the return of income being the amount ... claim for deduction u/s 80IB to
Rs.82,84,339/- in place of Rs.3,31,37,355/- and according to the
assessee
available
records, hence the same cannot be rejected.
4. Re: Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule ... confirming the disallowance of
additional amount of Rs. 5,45,95,563/- u/s 14A of the Act by invoking the provisions
of Rule
Baroda ,upholding the penalty of Rs.
5,29,355/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s.254 of the Income
facts in confirming the penalty of
Rs.3,24,355/- under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, such
penalty is requested ... Assessing Officer levied penalty of
Rs.3,24,355/- in respect of concealment of income u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.
6. Being
Ahmedabad dated 31.08.2015
confirming the penalty of Rs.4,78,355/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) by the ld.
Assessing Officer on the addition
facts in deleing the
penalty of Rs.5,01,355/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act,
1961.
On the facts
