https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5425 SC held that jurisdiction to impose penalty under s. 271(1)(c) depends on the law in force on the date when the assessing authority records satisfaction of concealment and passes the assessment order, not the date of filing of return. Under the amended s. 274(2) operative on the date of assessment, the Income-tax Officer was competent to levy penalty where concealed income was below Rs. 25,000. The requirement that penalty be quantified as per the law on the date of the offending return does not alter who may impose it at the time of assessment. The HC's view upholding the Income-tax Officer's jurisdiction was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 24 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Apr 2026 15:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5425 SC held that jurisdiction to impose penalty under s. 271(1)(c) depends on the law in force on the date when the assessing authority records satisfaction of concealment and passes the assessment order, not the date of filing of return. Under the amended s. 274(2) operative on the date of assessment, the Income-tax Officer was competent to levy penalty where concealed income was below Rs. 25,000. The requirement that penalty be quantified as per the law on the date of the offending return does not alter who may impose it at the time of assessment. The HC's view upholding the Income-tax Officer's jurisdiction was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 24 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5425