https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29588 The commentary explains that an amendment to section 275 of the Income-tax Act extending the limitation period for penalty orders applied to a pending proceeding that was not already time-barred when the amendment took effect, so the penalty order was within time. It also notes that, although sections 160 and 161 govern representative assessees, section 166 preserves direct assessment of the person beneficially entitled to the income; accordingly, direct penalty action against a minor assessee was permissible on the facts discussed. The stated result is that both questions were answered in favour of the Revenue. en-us Fri, 15 Jan 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:01:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29588 The commentary explains that an amendment to section 275 of the Income-tax Act extending the limitation period for penalty orders applied to a pending proceeding that was not already time-barred when the amendment took effect, so the penalty order was within time. It also notes that, although sections 160 and 161 govern representative assessees, section 166 preserves direct assessment of the person beneficially entitled to the income; accordingly, direct penalty action against a minor assessee was permissible on the facts discussed. The stated result is that both questions were answered in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 Jan 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29588