1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal Upholds Penalty Reduction Decision</h1> The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal and upheld the decision of the Appellate Authority to reduce the penalty under section 271(1)(a). The ... - Issues: Reduction of penalty under section 271(1)(a) by the Appellate AuthorityAnalysis:The Department appealed against the Appellate Authority's decision to reduce the penalty imposed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under section 271(1)(a). The ITO had imposed a penalty due to the assessee's failure to file a return for the assessment year 1969-70 within the statutory period. The assessee, a partner in a firm, claimed that the delay was due to not receiving intimation of the share income from the firm. The ITO found that apart from the share income, the assessee had income from property and had not applied for an extension of time. The Appellate Authority reduced the period of default and the quantum of penalty, leading to the Department's appeal.The Revenue contended that the Appellate Authority was unjustified in reducing the default period and the penalty amount. They argued that since the firm had filed its return on 7th Sept. 1971, the assessee's claim of not filing the return due to lack of intimation was invalid. The assessee, on the other hand, argued that without receiving intimation of the share income from the firm, filing the return was not possible. They highlighted disputes among the firm partners affecting the return filing process. The Tribunal considered these arguments and found that the firm had filed a return for the same assessment year and had its penalty canceled. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee's failure to file the return promptly. Therefore, they upheld the Appellate Authority's decision to reduce the penalty and instructed the ITO to reassess the penalty amount.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, affirming the Appellate Authority's decision to reduce the penalty under section 271(1)(a).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
