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>Penalties for Tax Estimate Inaccuracies Apply Retroactively</h1> The Supreme Court clarified that penalties under section 273 of the new Act can be imposed for inaccuracies in tax estimates provided by a ... Allegation of furnishing inaccurate estimates of tax - default under section 18A of the old Act - held that section 297(2)(g) is clearly applicable to this case inasmuch as the assessment was completed on or after the first day of April, 1962. The provisions of the new Act contained in section 273 will apply mutatis mutandis to proceedings relating to penalty initiated in accordance with section 297(2)(g) of the new Act - question is answered in revenue's favour Issues:1. Imposition of penalties under section 273 of the new Act for furnishing inaccurate tax estimates.2. Interpretation of provisions under section 18A of the old Act and section 212 of the new Act.3. Applicability of section 297(2)(g) of the new Act to save proceedings under the old Act.Analysis:The judgment addressed the issue of penalties imposed under section 273 of the new Act for inaccurate tax estimates provided by the respondent-company. The company filed revised tax estimates for two assessment years, but the Income-tax Officer found them to be inaccurate and imposed penalties. The Tribunal initially held that penalties could not be imposed under the new Act for defaults under the old Act. However, the Supreme Court clarified that section 297(2)(g) of the new Act saved proceedings under the old Act for penalties imposed after the assessment was completed under the new Act.The judgment delved into the interpretation of provisions under section 18A of the old Act and section 212 of the new Act. Section 18A of the old Act allowed for advance tax payments and penalties for furnishing inaccurate tax estimates. In contrast, section 212 of the new Act dealt with estimates and penalties for untrue tax estimates. The court highlighted the differences in the provisions and their application to the case at hand.Regarding the applicability of section 297(2)(g) of the new Act to save proceedings under the old Act, the court referred to the Jain Bros. v. Union of India case. The court emphasized that section 297(2)(g) allowed for penalties under the new Act for assessments completed after a certain date, thereby enabling the imposition of penalties under section 273 of the new Act for defaults under the old Act. The judgment concluded by affirming the applicability of section 297(2)(g) to the case and ruling in favor of the Commissioner of Income-tax, entitling them to costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
