https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38211 The court ruled in favor of the revenue and against the assessee in this case. The quantum of penalty was determined to be as per the amended provisions of section 271(1)(c) effective from April 1, 1968, based on the date of filing the returns. Additionally, it was held that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to impose the penalty, despite the amendment raising the minimum penalty amount. The assessee was directed to pay the costs of the reference to the Commissioner, along with an advocate's fee of Rs. 250. en-us Wed, 25 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Apr 2010 17:37:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38211 The court ruled in favor of the revenue and against the assessee in this case. The quantum of penalty was determined to be as per the amended provisions of section 271(1)(c) effective from April 1, 1968, based on the date of filing the returns. Additionally, it was held that the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to impose the penalty, despite the amendment raising the minimum penalty amount. The assessee was directed to pay the costs of the reference to the Commissioner, along with an advocate's fee of Rs. 250. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38211