Customs valuation and classification require comparable evidence and assessment of imported goods in their actual condition, invalidating related pena...
The ITAT held that the penalty proceedings under section 271C were time-barred as the penalty order was passed beyond the six-month limitation period prescribed under section 275(1)(c) from the date the AO referred the matter to the Addl. CIT. Since the reference was made on 10.10.2016, the penalty order issued thereafter exceeded the statutory limitation period. Consequently, the penalty order was quashed as being invalid and barred by limitation. The appeals filed by the assessee were allowed accordingly.
The ITAT held that the penalty proceedings under section 271C were time-barred as the penalty order was passed beyond the six-month limitation period prescribed under section 275(1)(c) from the date the AO referred the matter to the Addl. CIT. Since the reference was made on 10.10.2016, the penalty order issued thereafter exceeded the statutory limitation period. Consequently, the penalty order was quashed as being invalid and barred by limitation. The appeals filed by the assessee were allowed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
