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>Revenue's Appeals Dismissed for Penalty Cancellation under IT Act</h1> <h3>SEVENTH INCOME TAX OFFICER. Versus NEESHA PLAST INDUSTRIES.</h3> SEVENTH INCOME TAX OFFICER. Versus NEESHA PLAST INDUSTRIES. - TTJ 027, 047, Issues:- Appeal against cancellation of penalties under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the assessment years 1980-81 to 1982-83.Detailed Analysis:1. Facts Leading to Appeals:- The assessee did not file returns for the assessment years 1980-81 to 1982-83.- The Department searched the assessee's premises under section 132 of the IT Act.- A settlement was reached between the assessee and the CIT, agreeing to be assessed on specific incomes for the mentioned years.- The ITO initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and imposed penalties based on the CIT's directions.2. Contentions of the Parties:- The Department argued that penalties were imposed based on the agreement between the assessee and the Department, and the CIT's directions were issued under section 273A.- The assessee contended that no concealment or inaccurate particulars were present when the settlement was reached, and penalties were not agreed upon for the years in question.3. Judgment and Analysis:- The AAC cancelled the penalties, stating there was no concealment in the returns filed by the assessee.- The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, noting that no concealment was detected in the filed returns, thus penalties under section 271(1)(c) were not justified.- It was clarified that penalties were agreed upon for a different assessment year, not the years under appeal, as per the settlement document.- The Tribunal emphasized that no concealment or inaccurate particulars were found, rendering penalty imposition baseless.- The Tribunal upheld the AAC's decision to cancel the penalties, citing the assessee's statutory right to challenge penalty orders.4. Conclusion:- The appeals by the Revenue against the cancellation of penalties were dismissed, affirming that penalties under section 271(1)(c) were not applicable due to the absence of concealment or inaccurate particulars in the filed returns.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
