9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... barred he apprised us that a return of income was filed on31st March, 1999declaring total income of Rs. 55,000. An assessment under s. 144 r/w s. 147 of the Act was made on31st Jan., 2003at an income of Rs. 15,06,046. Penalty proceedings under s. 271 (1)(c) were initiated and notice under s. 274 r/w s. 271(1)(c) was issued to the assessee on31st Jan., 2003. The penalty order has been passed on24th March, 2005. He pointed out that assessment order was challenged by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) but the appeal was time-barred and accordingly it was dismissed on the ground of limitation alone. Thereafter, no further proceedings have been taken by the assessee. Taking us through s. 275 wherein limitation to pass penalty order under thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The penalty order has been passed on24th March, 2005which is time-barred. He further contended that the issue is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Asstt. CIT vs. Birkmyre Export Co. (P) Ltd. (2002) 75 TTJ (Kol) 1005. 3. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative relied upon the order of CIT(A) and submitted that assessment order was subject-matter of appeal before the CIT(A) even though the appeal was dismissed on account of limitation but the order was under challenge. Therefore, limitation has to be counted from the order of the CIT(A). The learned counsel for the assessee while rebutting the contentions of the learned Departmental Representative submitted that Tribunal in the case of Bir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... completed and, therefore, the last date for imposition of penalty would be31st Jan., 1992. being later of the two terminus i.e.,31st March, 1992, being the end of the financial year and31st Jan., 1992, the expiry of six months from the end of the assessment made on2nd July, 1991. This is so far as the penalty under ss. 271(1)(c), 273(2)(b) and 271(1)(a) are concerned." 5. There is no dispute that quantum appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) being barred by limitation. Thus, the only issue before us is whether it can be said that the assessment order was subject-matter of the appeal before the learned CIT(A). In our opinion, Tribunal has considered this issue in the findings extracted supra, more so, unless a valid ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
