https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335725 Penalty proceedings under section 45(6) were not invalidated merely because they were initiated belatedly, as no express limitation period was prescribed and the assessee showed no prejudice from the delay. The penalty was therefore sustained. However, interest on the penalty amount could not be imposed for the interregnum before the penalty order, and any interest liability was confined to commence only from the date of the order. The note thus distinguishes validity of delayed penalty initiation from the separate question of when interest on the penalty may start running. en-us Wed, 09 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Dec 2016 15:05:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335725 Penalty proceedings under section 45(6) were not invalidated merely because they were initiated belatedly, as no express limitation period was prescribed and the assessee showed no prejudice from the delay. The penalty was therefore sustained. However, interest on the penalty amount could not be imposed for the interregnum before the penalty order, and any interest liability was confined to commence only from the date of the order. The note thus distinguishes validity of delayed penalty initiation from the separate question of when interest on the penalty may start running. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 09 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335725