<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1969 (12) TMI 19 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7746</link>
    <description>A revised return filed before completion of assessment does not automatically wipe out earlier concealment; the assessee&#039;s later conduct and surrounding facts remain relevant in determining penalty liability. On the facts stated, the Tribunal accepted the explanations for the omission, found that deliberate concealment was not proved, and that view was left undisturbed. A statutory reference at the assessee&#039;s instance was held incompetent where no proper application had been made under the reference procedure. The Tribunal was also said to have jurisdiction, as the final fact-finding authority, to express a view on penalty quantum while cancelling the penalty order, so as to avoid piecemeal adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 17:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1969 (12) TMI 19 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7746</link>
      <description>A revised return filed before completion of assessment does not automatically wipe out earlier concealment; the assessee&#039;s later conduct and surrounding facts remain relevant in determining penalty liability. On the facts stated, the Tribunal accepted the explanations for the omission, found that deliberate concealment was not proved, and that view was left undisturbed. A statutory reference at the assessee&#039;s instance was held incompetent where no proper application had been made under the reference procedure. The Tribunal was also said to have jurisdiction, as the final fact-finding authority, to express a view on penalty quantum while cancelling the penalty order, so as to avoid piecemeal adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>