The case deals with the limitation period for initiating penalty ...

Tax penalty time limit missed by Revenue despite valid notice from Assessing Officer.

Case Laws Income Tax

November 29, 2024

The case deals with the limitation period for initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271E of the Income Tax Act. It is well-established that the limitation period commences from the date of issuance of notice by the Assessing Officer, not from the subsequent notice by the Joint/Additional Commissioner. In this case, the Assessing Officer issued the penalty notice on 31/12/2010 along with the assessment order, while the Additional Commissioner issued another notice on 30/06/2011. The initial notice by the Assessing Officer remains valid and operative. Therefore, the imposition of penalty u/s 271E should have been done before 30/06/2011, not 31/12/2011. The CIT(Appeals), following judicial precedents and CBDT Circular, rightly deleted the penalty, and the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, finding no merit.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The case deals with the limitation period for initiating penalty ...

Tax penalty time limit missed by Revenue despite valid notice from Assessing Officer.

Case Laws Income Tax

November 29, 2024

You may also like:

The issue pertained to the validity of filing a revised return after the prescribed time limit. The High Court set aside the Tribunal's order, stating that after the...

Validity of reopening of assessment - time limit for issue of notice u/s. 143(2) has not expired and regular assessment could have been made - the assessing officer...

The High Court examined the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the prescribed income-tax authority to issue notices u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. It held...

The case pertains to the scope of limited scrutiny by the assessing officer regarding computation of capital gains u/s 45 and providing exemption u/s 54B of the Income...

Section 142(1) notice issued by non-jurisdictional officer held valid. Plain reading of Section 143(2) indicates either Assessing Officer or prescribed income-tax...

Revision u/s 263 - merger of the order - the entire issue of limited scrutiny, reasons for selection, the Bank accounts in questions were before the ld. Pr. CIT. On this...

The notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act was issued on 15.10.2013, beyond the prescribed time limit of six months from the end of the assessment year, i.e., 30.9.2013....

Penalty levied u/s 274 read with Section 270A - assessee computed tax on disallowed depreciation amount at maximum marginal rate and levied 200% penalty on payable tax -...

Penalty u/s 272A(2)(g) was levied for not issuing TDS certificates in Form 16A to deductees on time. The issue pertained to the period of limitation for issuing the...

GST, a success of vast proportions, decreased tax incidence on common man, reduced compliance burden and logistics cost for trade and industry. Amendments facilitated...

Issue of faceless assessment of income escaping assessment, where the notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO)...

Limitation for passing a assessment order - Consequential order passed by the assessing authority beyond the time limit specified u/s 153 (2A) - The High Court examined...

Assessee company failed to deduct tax at source as reflected in Tax Auditor's report. Demand u/s 201(1)/201(14) was barred by limitation. Assessee submitted that...

The Appellate Tribunal held that the issuance of a valid notice u/s 143(2) is a prerequisite for framing a valid assessment, in line with the Supreme Court's judgments...

This judgment deals with the validity of reassessment notices issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act between July and September 2022, in light of the Tax Ordinance and the...

Quick Updates: