Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3481 to 3500 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Validity of penalty proceedings turned on whether the limitation period in clause (c) of Section 275(1) is residuary; the court held clause (c) is residuary and clauses (a) or (b) apply where penalty proceedings originate from an assessment or revision. Because the penalty under the special provision arose from an assessment linked to admissions during search and was appealed, the court applied the limitation computation under clause (a), measuring six months from receipt of the appellate tribunal order and finding the penalty issued on the final permissible date. Revision proceedings were quashed, so clause (b) did not apply, and the writ was dismissed.
Validity of penalty proceedings turned on whether the limitation period in clause (c) of Section 275(1) is residuary; the court held clause (c) is residuary and clauses (a) or (b) apply where penalty proceedings originate from an assessment or revision. Because the penalty under the special provision arose from an assessment linked to admissions during search and was appealed, the court applied the limitation computation under clause (a), measuring six months from receipt of the appellate tribunal order and finding the penalty issued on the final permissible date. Revision proceedings were quashed, so clause (b) did not apply, and the writ was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.