Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad Versus Shri Vishwendra B. Panwar

2015 (8) TMI 663 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Penalty levied u/s 271D - violation of provisions of section 269SS - Tribunal deleted penalty levy - Low tax effect - Held that:- The Central Board for Direct Tax (CBDT) has issued Instruction No.5 of 2014 and in line with its earlier Instruction No. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l having tax effect of less than ₹ 10 lakhs in terms of Instruction No.3 of 2011. This on the ground that the instructions of CBDT in terms of Section 268A of the Act will ever apply to pending appeals. Thus, following the above decision, we ar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n CIT vs. Surya Harbal Ltd.[2011 (8) TMI 137 - Supreme Court of India].

The present appeal has a tax effect of only ₹ 4,42,000/-, we see no reason to entertain the proposed questions of law. - Decided against revenue. - Notice of Mot .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

been taken out by the Applicant for condoning the delay of 1178 days in filing the appeal. 2. The Notice of Motion indicate that the delay is of 740 days. Assessing Officer has filed an affidavit dated 3.8.2015 wherein he has indicated that the delay .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sons indicated in the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion, we condone the delay of 1178 days in filing the appeal. The Notice of motion is allowed in above terms. 3. At the request of the learned Counsel for the Appellant, the appeal itself .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

our consideration: "(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271D of ₹ 4,42,000/- even after the establishment of the fact that assessee has violated provi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

accounts of assessee in violation of section 269SS? (c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in deleting the penalty u/s 271D on the pretext that similar amounts were added in the case of Shri B.S. Panw .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as been filed challenging the order of the Tribunal dated 18th February, 2009, deleting the penalty of ₹ 4,42,000/-. The assessing officer one Mr. Gupta has also filed an affidavit dated 3.8.2015 wherein he has indicated tax effect in the prese .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version