Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty proceedings in respect of reassessments completed after 1 April 1962, but relating to earlier assessment years, were governed by section 297(2)(g) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to impose penalty under section 271(1)(c).
Analysis: The expression "assessment" in section 297(2)(f) and section 297(2)(g) was read in the light of section 2(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which includes reassessment. Since the penalty proceedings arose out of reassessment orders made after the commencement of the 1961 Act, the later clause applied. The provision was also understood consistently with the statutory scheme and the interpretation placed on it by the Supreme Court.
Conclusion: Penalty could be imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction; the answer was in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue.
Final Conclusion: Reassessment completed after the commencement of the 1961 Act attracted the penalty machinery under the repealed-and-savings provision, and the penalty orders were not void for want of jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of section 297(2)(g) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the term "assessment" includes reassessment, so penalty proceedings arising from reassessments completed after 1 April 1962 are governed by the 1961 Act.