https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29597 The court held that the Income-tax Officer (ITO) had jurisdiction to levy a penalty for concealment of income as the amendment to Section 274(2) was in force before the penalty proceedings were initiated. Since the concealed income did not exceed Rs. 25,000, the ITO was deemed competent to impose the penalty. The decision was against the assessee and in favor of the department, with the court directing a copy of the judgment to be forwarded to the Tribunal as required by law. en-us Fri, 07 Nov 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:25:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29597 The court held that the Income-tax Officer (ITO) had jurisdiction to levy a penalty for concealment of income as the amendment to Section 274(2) was in force before the penalty proceedings were initiated. Since the concealed income did not exceed Rs. 25,000, the ITO was deemed competent to impose the penalty. The decision was against the assessee and in favor of the department, with the court directing a copy of the judgment to be forwarded to the Tribunal as required by law. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Nov 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29597