https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27720 The High Court of Rajasthan ruled that penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were properly initiated by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) and referred to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC) in a case involving M/s. Phusraj Gangabishan. The court clarified that the ITO could initiate penalty proceedings and refer the case to the IAC if the minimum penalty exceeded Rs. 1,000, in line with previous judgments and the Supreme Court decision in Manasvi v. CIT. Consequently, the court upheld the penalty imposed by the IAC against the assessee. en-us Fri, 17 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:58:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27720 The High Court of Rajasthan ruled that penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were properly initiated by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) and referred to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC) in a case involving M/s. Phusraj Gangabishan. The court clarified that the ITO could initiate penalty proceedings and refer the case to the IAC if the minimum penalty exceeded Rs. 1,000, in line with previous judgments and the Supreme Court decision in Manasvi v. CIT. Consequently, the court upheld the penalty imposed by the IAC against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27720