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 →

The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. KSB Pumps Ltd.

2016 (7) TMI 61 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Penalty levied under Section 271 (1)(c) - difference between the amount paid in advance as the net present value of the actual sales tax liability and the actual liability - Held that:- the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied under .....

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 be entertained - Penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) - claim under Section 80M disallowed - Held that:- Tribunal was justified deleting the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) on the disallowed claim under Section 80M on the basis of 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

A. Kazi For the Respondent : Mr. R. Murlidharan with B.G. Yewale i/b Rajesh Shah & Co. ORDER P. C. 1. This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 10th June, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271 (1)(c) on the amount being the difference between the amount paid in advance as the net present value of the actual sales tax liability and the actual liability, based on the fact that t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r Section 271(1)(c) on the disallowed claim under Section 80M on the basis of the fact that this quantum disallowance was deleted by the Hon'ble Tribunal but which decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal has not been accepted by the Revenue ? 3. Reg .....

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 respect of the same respondent assessee. (b) Mr. Malhotra, learned counsel for the revenue states that being aggrieved by the order dated 7th September, 2011 of the Tribunal in quantum proceedings, the revenue had preferred an appeal being Appeal 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

herefore no fault can be found with the impugned order of the Tribunal. (c) Consequently, the question as framed does not give rise to any substantial question of law as the issue stands concluded in favour of the revenue on merits by virtue of decis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e respondent assessee, consequent to disallowing the respondent assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80M of the Act. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 10th June, 2013 upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) del .....

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