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 →

AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

2016 (2) TMI 41 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - recovering full amount of penalty - Held that:- As against quantum addition, the petitioner has already appealed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has granted stay against recovery on the condition of depositing 50% of tax dues. The appeal against quantum addition is ripe for hearing before the Tribunal. Quite apart from these developments, it is hugely doubtful whether this would be a case for penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act which is imposable on 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

he Act, is only a matter of interpretation. Even post amendment with effect from 1.4.2009, the petitioner's claim for exemption would be eligible or not, is purely a question of law. We fail to see what could be the omission on part of the assessee to disclose inaccurate particulars of the income or conceal the particulars of income in the present case so as to invite penalty. Facts would have to be viewed in light of ratio of decision in case of Commissioner of Incometax v. Reliance Petroproduc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

M BHATT, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. The petitioner is Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority and has challenged the action of department of recovering full amount of penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer in connection with the assessment year 20102011. 2. Brief facts are that for the assessment year 20102011, the petitioner filed return of income disclosing nil income. The Assessing Officer however, disputed such computation on the ground that the petitio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Assessing Officer directed to make coercive recovery upon which this petition came to be filed. 3. Having heard learned advocates for the parties and having perused the documents on record, what emerges is that against quantum addition, the petitioner has already appealed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has granted stay against recovery on the condition of depositing 50% of tax dues. The appeal against quantum addition is ripe for hearing before the Tribunal. Quite apart from these developm .....

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