HC dismissed petition challenging penalty proceedings under ...

Penalty Proceedings Under Section 271DA Valid When Initiated Within 11 Days of Assessment Order Completion

January 31, 2025

Case Laws Income Tax HC

HC dismissed petition challenging penalty proceedings under s271DA. AO initiated proceedings via reference to Addl. CIT within 11 days of assessment order completion (08.04.2024), following assessment order dated 28.03.2024. Six-month limitation period commenced from reference date. Court held timing reasonable, rejecting petitioner's argument of arbitrary extension. While acknowledging that inordinate delays require scrutiny and reasonable timeframe applies where no specific limitation exists, HC found 11-day gap between assessment completion and penalty initiation well within acceptable bounds. Proceedings deemed within limitation period prescribed under s275(1)(c).

View Source

← Previous Next →

HC dismissed petition challenging penalty proceedings under ...

Penalty Proceedings Under Section 271DA Valid When Initiated Within 11 Days of Assessment Order Completion

January 31, 2025

Case Laws Income Tax HC

You may also like:

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - AO has not applied his mind before initiating the penalty proceedings rather borrowed his satisfaction from the “tax...

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...

SEBI modified timelines in Master Circular for Credit Rating Agencies (CRAs) to promote ease of doing business. Key changes are publication of press release within 7...

The key points are regarding the penalty imposed u/s 271D read with Section 269SS, and the issue of whether the penalty orders were time-barred. The Assessing Officer...

Denial of exemption u/s 11(2) was contested due to the trust's failure to file Form No. 10 within the due date specified u/s 139(1) owing to technical issues. The...

Restriction on Benefit of reduction / Nil rate of penalty - Applicability of Section 73(11) or 73(8) - assessee had paid the tax within thirty days from the issue of...

The case involved denial of exemption u/s 11 due to late filing of return. The department argued return must be filed u/s 139(1) to claim exemption u/s 11. An amendment...

Condonation of delay in filing appeal - In the present case, in four months, around 121 days come, and the appeal was filed on 121st day. The appellate authority should...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Validity of notice - It is a well settled proposition of law that penalty cannot be initiated for the limb, which is different from the limb for...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - in the assessment order, AO has made it clear that penalty proceedings are initiated separately for furnishing...

HC dismissed the grievance. Interpretation of RBI's Master Circular on export credit: Advances financing exports within 450 days constitute "export credit" eligible for...

HC ruled against petitioner companies seeking refund of additional fees charged for delayed financial statement filing. Companies held AGM on 29.10.2019 within statutory...

Exemption u/s 11 - assessee has not e-filed or not filed return within due date - The NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) ruled in favor of the Assessee, stating that the CBDT circular...

Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271C and the limitation period for levying such penalty. The key points are: The penalty proceedings were initiated on the date of...

Section 19(11) of TNVAT was a valid piece of legislation, cannot be struck down as being either unreasonable or discriminatory and violative of Article 265 and 360A of...

Quick Updates: