https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276852 A saving clause limited to levy, assessment and collection of income-tax and super-tax does not preserve a separate penal power unless penalty is expressly continued. The text distinguishes tax liability from penal consequences, so the Income-tax Officer could not rely on the saving provision to impose penalty under the repealed Hyderabad law. It also explains that the appellate scheme is broad enough to cover penalty orders, including jurisdictional objections, and that an appellate forum may decide whether the original authority acted within power. On that basis, the penalty order was unsustainable and consequential relief followed. en-us Thu, 04 Oct 1956 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Nov 2018 15:06:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276852 A saving clause limited to levy, assessment and collection of income-tax and super-tax does not preserve a separate penal power unless penalty is expressly continued. The text distinguishes tax liability from penal consequences, so the Income-tax Officer could not rely on the saving provision to impose penalty under the repealed Hyderabad law. It also explains that the appellate scheme is broad enough to cover penalty orders, including jurisdictional objections, and that an appellate forum may decide whether the original authority acted within power. On that basis, the penalty order was unsustainable and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 04 Oct 1956 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276852