Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Income Tax Officer, Ward 4 (2) , New Delhi Versus JKD Capital & Finlease Ltd.

2015 (10) TMI 1484 - ITAT DELHI

Penalty under section 271E - CIT(A) held that the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer was barred by limitation - Held that:- CIT(A) rightly held that the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer was barred by limitation as the penalty order was passed beyond six months from the end of the month in which penalty proceedings were initiated, while penalty proceedings were initiated in the month of December 2007 and the penalty order was thus required to be passed before 30th June, 20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

decided any factual aspects on merits nor has he admitted any additional evidence. In any event, no specific arguments were advanced in support of this grievance. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No.: 5443/Del/2013 - Dated:- 27-3-2015 - I.C. Sudhir, JM and Pramod Kumar, AM P. Dam Kaunajma, for the appellant Ashwani Taneja, for the respondent ORDER Per Pramod Kumar: 1. By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged the correctness of the ld. CIT(A) s order dated 22nd July, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nalty is barred by limitation whereas the limitation starts from the date of receipts of CIT(A) order in the CIT office, which is 06.04.2010, therefore time baring limit for passing Penalty Order is 31.03.2012 ? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in treating the repayment as share capital instead of loans as held by AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in Quantum appeal ? 4. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- The Addl. CIT imposed the penalty u/s 271E vide order passed dated 20.03.2012 on a reference received from the AO, who initiated the penalty proceedings as per assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dated 28.12.2007, as is apparent from the last para of the assessment order. This action of the AO confirms that the impugned penalty u/s 271E was initiated on 28.12.2007. in the penalty order u/s 271E, in para 3 at first page, Additional CIT has stated that pursuant to the dismissal of the appeal the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty order should have been passed within the financial year itself in which the penalty proceedings were initiated or within six months from the end of the month in which the penalty proceedings were initiated, whichever period expires later, and in the present case the penalty order could have been passed on or before 30.06.2008. Therefore, the penalty order passed u/s 271E on 20.03.2012 is barred by limitation and deserves to be quashed on this ground alone. 3. The Assessing Officer is aggrieve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ictional High Court. In the case of CIT vs. Worldwide Township Projects Ltd (269 CTR 444), Their Lordships has, in this regard, held as follows :- 5. Concededly, if Section 275(1)(c) of the Act is applicable, the penalty order is beyond the prescribed period. In the present case, the penalty sought to be imposed on the assessee is for alleged violation of Section 269SS of the Act. It is well settled that a penalty under this provision is independent of the assessment. The action inviting imposit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

factually similar to the present one, expressed similar view and held as under:- The expression other relevant thing used in Section 275(1)(a) and clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of section 275 is significantly missing from clause (c) of section 275(1) to make out this distinction very clear. We are, therefore, of the opinion that since penalty proceedings for default in not having transactions through the bank as required under sections 269SS and 269T are not related to the assessment proceeding .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a matter of fact every penalty proceeding is usually initiated when during some proceedings such default is noticed, though the final fact finding in this proceeding may not have any bearing on the issues relating to establishing default e.g. penalty for not deducting tax at source while making payment to employees, or contractor, or for that matter not making payment through cheque or demand draft where it is so required to be made. Either of the contingencies does not affect the computation o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version