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

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) , Gurgaon Versus M/s Nectar Lifescience Limited

2017 (9) TMI 821 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - appeal under Section 260A before this Court maintainable - Held that:- The matter is no longer res integra. This Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Gurgaon Vs. M/s Parabolic Drugs Limited [2013 (1) TMI 565 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] following the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Faridabad Vs. M/s Motorola India Limited [2007 (10) TMI 384 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT] had held as under:- - “Accordingly, the present .....

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 appeal is returned to the revenue for filing before the competent court of jurisdiction in accordance with law. - ITA No. 274 of 2017 - Dated:- 28-8-2017 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. AMIT RAWAL, JJ. For The Appellant-Revenue : Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Tushar Gera, Advocate ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. The appellant-revenue has filed the instant appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act ) against the order dated 30.11.2016, Annexure .....

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 case, the finding recorded by the Assessing Officer in quantum proceedings establishing the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by assessee which was affirmed by the CIT(A) and further affirmed by ITAT has not been considered appropriately by the ITAT by passing the impugned order dated 30.11.2016? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the wrong and inaccurate claim made by assessee under Section 80HHC regarding working of business profits can be said to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ther on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in hand the view point of the ITAT taken in impugned order is neither sustainable in the eyes of law nor maintainable in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and is not perverse in nature? (vii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in hand the view point of the ITAT while passing the impugned order is not non-speaking in nature? 2. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as nar .....

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 assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals [CIT(A)]. The CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 29.07.2008, Annexure A.2, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) was passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 13(1), New Delhi, i.e. the Assessing Officer, imposing penalty of & .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| 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