Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Failure to Specify Tax Amount and Penalties Leads to Remand for Clarification</h1> The lower appellate authority failed to specify the tax amount and penalties under different sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The case is remanded to ... Demand and penalty - combined penalty was imposed on the appellant under sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 - order modified and the matter remanded to the original authority for requantifying the tax amount payable by the respondents and for determining penalties under different sections of the Finance Act, 1994 separately - Department’s appeal allowed by way of remand The lower appellate authority did not quantify the tax amount to be paid by the respondents and did not separate the penalties under different sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The case is remanded to the original authority for these actions. Department's appeal allowed for remand.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
