TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>ACIT penalty notice under sections 274/271C ruled time-barred due to revenue's extended inactivity violating section 275(1)(c) limitations</h1> <h3>ITO- (TDS), Jodhpur Versus Sh. Rajendra Kumbhat</h3> The ITAT Jodhpur held that a penalty notice under sections 274/271C issued by the ACIT on 08.01.2015 was time-barred and beyond the AO's jurisdiction. The ... Penalty u/s 271C - period of limitation - whether Notice time barred and beyond the jurisdiction of the ld. AO? - long time revenue was totally inaction and not levied the penalty - HELD THAT:- The notice u/s 274/271C was duly issued to the assessee by the ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur on dated 08.01.2015, the liable for imposition of penalty was duly crossed the limit by violating the provision of section 275(1)(c).The levying the penalty U/s 271C is time barred and beyond the jurisdiction of the ld. AO. We do not intervene the appeal order. The appeal order is upheld. Accordingly, the penalty U/s 271C is quashed. Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:The appeal of the Revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jodhpur u/s 250 (6) of the Income Tax Act 1961 for A.Y. 2012-13.Summary:1. The Revenue challenged the decision of the ld. CIT(A) regarding the imposition of penalty u/s 271C of the Act.2. The main contention was whether the penalty was time-barred and if the AO was justified in imposing the penalty of Rs. 6,000.3. The assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, and the penalty notice was initiated by the ld. AO on 01.08.2018 u/s 274/271C of the Act.4. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the penalty u/s 271C, citing contravention of section 275(1)(c) of the Act, leading to the quashing of the penalty amount.5. The Revenue argued that the penalty initiation notice by the ld. ACIT-1 Jodhpur on 08.01.2015 should be ignored, emphasizing the power of the ld. Additional Commissioner to levy the penalty u/s 271C.6. The appellant succeeded on the technical ground of the penalty being time-barred, rendering the second issue moot, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.7. The Tribunal upheld the appeal order, quashing the penalty u/s 271C amounting to Rs. 6,000, and subsequently dismissed the Revenue's appeal.This judgment highlights the importance of adhering to statutory timelines and the correct initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act 1961.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
