https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262776 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, following the legal position established by the Calcutta High Court, emphasizing the distinction between assessment and penalty proceedings. It held that the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271D, directed by the CIT, was beyond the scope of section 263. The Tribunal ruled that the failure to record penalty proceedings in the assessment order does not render the assessment erroneous. It highlighted the necessity for the Income-tax Officer to exercise discretion in initiating penalties based on the case's facts, ultimately siding with the assessee. en-us Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Aug 2015 15:01:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262776 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, following the legal position established by the Calcutta High Court, emphasizing the distinction between assessment and penalty proceedings. It held that the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271D, directed by the CIT, was beyond the scope of section 263. The Tribunal ruled that the failure to record penalty proceedings in the assessment order does not render the assessment erroneous. It highlighted the necessity for the Income-tax Officer to exercise discretion in initiating penalties based on the case's facts, ultimately siding with the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262776