9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (5) TMI 9X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the orders of penalty passed by the IAC on 17-3-1973 were within time and within his jurisdiction having regard to the provisions contained in sections 274 and 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the amendments effected to those sections by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act of 1970 ? " The reference relates to the years 1967-68 and 1968-69. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cember 11, 1970, the penalty could be imposed only within a period of two years from the completion of the assessment in view of s. 275(2) of the Act as it stood before its amendment on April 1. 1971. The Tribunal rejected the contention that the penalty proceedings were time barred, on the view that as the limitation for passing the penalty order had been extended by an amending Act with effect f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w of the amendment to s. 274(2). In I.T.R. No. 306 of 1974 (CIT v. Om Sons) decided by us today (since reported in [1979] 116 ITR 215), we have held that after the amendment to s. 274(2) of the Act, the ITO alone had jurisdiction to impose penalty in cases where the concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is up to Rs. 25,000. As in the present case, the order of penalty has been passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
