New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (3) TMI 1084 - ITAT DELHI

2016 (3) TMI 1084 - ITAT DELHI - TMI - Penalty u/s 271D / 271E - Issue of limitation by invoking “Rule 27” of ITAT Rules - period of limitation prescribed u/s 275(1)( c) - Held that:- all the impugned orders levying penalty are barred by Limitation. The penalty order should have been passed not later than 30th June, 2012. As the impugned order is passed beyond this date, all the appeals are barred by Limitation. Hence all the Revenue appeals are dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA N .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t Year s(A.Y.) 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2009-10. As the issues arising in all these appeals are common, for the sake of convenience they are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order. 1.1. The assessee raised the issue of limitation by invoking Rule 27 of ITAT Rules. As the Ld.CIT(A) had considered this ground of the assessee and decided the issue against the assessee, we hold that the assessee is entitled to raise this ground on the issue of limitation under R .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/o:p> 4.3 Section 275 imposes certain limitation on passing of penalty orders. The relevant dates in the case are as under:- Date of search 30.06.2009 Date of order u/s l53A 30.12.2011 Date of reference by AO to Addl.CIT 30.05.2012 Date of notice u/s 271D / 271E to appellant 22.08.2012 Date of order by the Addl.CIT 30.11.2012 4.4 The case of the appellant is that the limitation contained in section 275(1)(c) is applicable to its c .....

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 is initiated, which ever period expires later. In the present case, the first period of limitation expired at the end of FY 2011-12, i.e. on 31.03.2012, as the assessment order was passed on 30.12.2011 and there appears to be no further appeal against the said order. The subsequent period in the case, however, expired at the end of six months on 28.02.2013, as the action for imposition of penalty, i.e. issue of notice u/s 271 D / 271 E by the Addl.CIT, was taken on 22.08.2012. As the order wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ned Standing counsel for the Revenue. Section 275 (1) (c) reads as under: 275. (1) No order imposing a penalty under this Chapter shall be passed (a).... (b)..... (c) in any other case, after the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or six months from the end of the month in which action for imposition of penalty is initiated, whichever peri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le date is expiry of six months from the month in which the penalty proceedings were initiated. With the AO having initiated the penalty proceedings in December 2007, the last date by which the penalty order could have been passed is 30th June 2008. The later of the two dates is 30th June 2008. 3.2. Further at para 11 it was held as follows. 11. In fact, when the AO recommended the initiation of penalty proceedings the AO appeared to be conscious of the fact that he did 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

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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