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

Appellate Tribunal upholds penalty on husband acting on behalf of dormant partner and partnership firm.

December 28, 2016

Case Laws Central Excise HC

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 ...

Appellate Tribunal upholds penalty on husband acting on behalf of dormant partner and partnership firm.

December 28, 2016

Case Laws Central Excise HC

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...

The assessing officer (AO) is empowered u/s 275(1A) to revise the penalty order by giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee within six months from the...

This case deals with the levy of penalties u/ss 271AAA and 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act in relation to various additions made to the assessee's income based on seized...

CESTAT, an Appellate Tribunal, considered a case involving penalty u/s 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 on a co-noticee who is a Partner in a Customs Broker firm for...

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

The High Court considered the legality of a penalty imposed u/s 31(3) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, due to the want of Form 28B. The issue was whether the defendants...

Levy of Penalty u/s 112 - Scope of the show cause notice - The CESTAT noted that, no show cause notice has been issued proposing the demand of differential duty or the...

Levy of penalties under various sections - The Appellate Tribunal, in a consolidated order, addressed several appeals concerning penalties imposed under various sections...

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...

The HC upheld the order of the Revisional Court, declining to quash the complaint u/ss 138/141 of the NI Act against the petitioners, who were partners of the...

ITAT adjudicated a dispute involving inter-company transactions and potential tax violations. The tribunal examined transactions between an assessee company and its...

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...

The Appellate Tribunal found that the penalty was initiated u/s. 271DA instead of u/s. 271D, which led to confusion and violated the assessee's right to a fair hearing....

Levy of simultaneous penalties on both the Partner and Partnership firm in adjudication proceedings under the Customs Act. - Penalty for abeting - Simultaneous...

Customs authority rejected transaction value declared by importer and enhanced value based on email evidence and statement of partner admitting negotiated higher price....

Quick Updates: