https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36460 The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC) was not legally competent to pass a penalty order under section 271(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the penalty amount was less than Rs. 25,000, which could have been imposed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO). Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the penalty order. Regarding the timeliness of the penalty order, the High Court applied the amended clause stipulating that penalty proceedings must be completed within two years of the initiation, emphasizing the retrospective effect of procedural laws. en-us Fri, 08 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Mar 2010 15:00:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36460 The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (IAC) was not legally competent to pass a penalty order under section 271(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the penalty amount was less than Rs. 25,000, which could have been imposed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO). Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the penalty order. Regarding the timeliness of the penalty order, the High Court applied the amended clause stipulating that penalty proceedings must be completed within two years of the initiation, emphasizing the retrospective effect of procedural laws. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 08 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36460