9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against quantum addition is ripe for hearing before the Tribunal. Quite apart from these developments, it is hugely doubtful whether this would be a case for penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act which is imposable on the assessee furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income or concealing the particulars of income. The fact that the petitioner as a statutory authority is engaged in impleme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd reported in (22010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT). On such prima facie consideration, it is directed that pending the petitioner's appeal against the order of penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer, there shall be no coercive recovery of such penalty demand - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13713 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 8-12-2015 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. MO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (rounded off) and raising matching tax liabilities. The Assessing Officer also instituted penalty proceedings and passed a final order of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax on 31.3.2015 imposing penalty of ₹ 101.24 crores (rounded off). The petitioner applied for stay against the recovery of the penalty. Pending such application, the Assessing Officer directed to make coercive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oping of Ahmedabad urban area is well known to the department and all concerns. Whether such activity is a charitable activity and would qualify for exemption under section 12A of the Act and consequently the income from such activity would be exempted from tax under section 2(15) of the Act, is only a matter of interpretation. Even post amendment with effect from 1.4.2009, the petitioner's cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
