https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7946 A penalty notice is not invalid merely because it cites the wrong statutory provision, so long as the action is otherwise supportable under the correct law. Applying that principle, the notice referring to section 28(3) of the 1922 Act remained valid where the proceedings were governed by section 297(2)(g) of the 1961 Act. The Court also held that section 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is a limitation provision fixing the outer time limit for completion of penalty proceedings; it does not require those proceedings to be commenced before assessment is completed. On that construction, the timing objection failed and the penalty proceedings were upheld. en-us Mon, 09 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Mar 2009 09:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7946 A penalty notice is not invalid merely because it cites the wrong statutory provision, so long as the action is otherwise supportable under the correct law. Applying that principle, the notice referring to section 28(3) of the 1922 Act remained valid where the proceedings were governed by section 297(2)(g) of the 1961 Act. The Court also held that section 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is a limitation provision fixing the outer time limit for completion of penalty proceedings; it does not require those proceedings to be commenced before assessment is completed. On that construction, the timing objection failed and the penalty proceedings were upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 09 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7946