Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in sustaining the ...

Central Excise

December 28, 2016

Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in sustaining the penalty on the husband of the dormant partner, while sustaining the penalty on the Partnership Firm? - Though his wife is the partner, for all practical purposes, he was acting on her behalf as the partner. - Held Yes - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

Whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in sustaining the ...

Central Excise

December 28, 2016

You may also like:

Penalty proceedings u/s 270A - Applicable rate of penalty - The Appellate Tribunal noted that while the penalty notice cited under-reporting of income, the AO imposed...

Addition u/s 68 in the hands of partnership firm - capital introduced by five partners, which in turn was out of the loan advanced - The Appellate Tribunal (AT) examined...

Tribunal was justified in holding that no separate penalties were warranted on the partners in addition to the penalty on the partnership firm - AT

Smuggling - Prohibited goods - confiscation of cigarettes containers concealed in HDPE granules - Penalty u/s 112 (a) &(b) and 114AA - The Appellate Tribunal upheld the...

Adjustment of Penalties from Refund amount - After an appellate order allowed redemption of the seized currency upon payment of fines and penalties, the appellant filed...

Penalty u/s 112 - since penalty has been imposed on partnership firm under Section 112 (a), separate penalty on its partner would not be justified - AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - An order in the name of dead person - The Appellate Tribunal acknowledged that the penalty order was indeed issued in the name of a deceased...

Penalty u/s 270A - AO has disallowed the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 24 and Chapter-VIA deduction as false claims - The appellant contested the penalty on various...

Levy of penalty u/s 270A - Excess exemption claimed on Gratuity u/s 10(10)(i) and Leave Encashment receipts u/s 10(10AA)(ii) - The Appellate Tribunal recognized the...

Levy of penalty u/s 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - No independent reasons have been given by the first appellate authority to confirm the penalty under Section 78 of the...

Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 - Bogus capital introduced by the partners of the assessee-firm - as per CIT(A) Agriculture income shown by the partners was highly...

Clarification in respect of appeal in regard to non-constitution of Appellate Tribunal - CGST - Circular

Central Government, creation of the State Benches of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT)

Quashing of prosecution u/s 276C and 277 - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) deleted by CIT and confirmed by Tribunal - the prosecution cannot be sustained since the penalty after...

Income–tax (10th Amendment) Rules, 2018 - Form of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal

Quick Updates: