https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329261 The tribunal held that penalty proceedings under section 271D of the Act were not barred by limitation as the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Addl. CIT, not the assessing officer's intimation, triggered the time limit. On the merits of the penalty, the tribunal set aside the order and directed re-examination by the Addl. Commissioner due to new contentions raised by the appellant regarding the nature of the transaction and the applicability of penalty provisions. The appeal was partially allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the necessity for a fresh assessment based on the additional arguments presented. en-us Wed, 01 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 07:21:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329261 The tribunal held that penalty proceedings under section 271D of the Act were not barred by limitation as the initiation of penalty proceedings by the Addl. CIT, not the assessing officer's intimation, triggered the time limit. On the merits of the penalty, the tribunal set aside the order and directed re-examination by the Addl. Commissioner due to new contentions raised by the appellant regarding the nature of the transaction and the applicability of penalty provisions. The appeal was partially allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the necessity for a fresh assessment based on the additional arguments presented. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 01 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329261