https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28104 The court held that penalty proceedings are initiated when the Income Tax Officer (ITO) passes an order for penalty, and the jurisdiction of the authority to impose the penalty must align with the prevailing legal provisions unless there is a retrospective amendment. The decision emphasized the significance of understanding the procedural and jurisdictional aspects of penalty imposition in income tax cases and upheld the view that the initiation of penalty proceedings triggers the question of jurisdiction. The court ruled against the assessee, affirming the authority's jurisdiction to pass the penalty order based on the prevailing legal provisions. en-us Fri, 09 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Feb 2010 10:56:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28104 The court held that penalty proceedings are initiated when the Income Tax Officer (ITO) passes an order for penalty, and the jurisdiction of the authority to impose the penalty must align with the prevailing legal provisions unless there is a retrospective amendment. The decision emphasized the significance of understanding the procedural and jurisdictional aspects of penalty imposition in income tax cases and upheld the view that the initiation of penalty proceedings triggers the question of jurisdiction. The court ruled against the assessee, affirming the authority's jurisdiction to pass the penalty order based on the prevailing legal provisions. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 09 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28104