https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762736 The court set aside the impugned penalty order issued under the Income Tax Act against the petitioner, a partnership firm, for contravention of Section 269ST, due to it being barred by limitation. The key issue was the interpretation of the initiation date for penalty proceedings under Section 275(1)(c). The court determined that the initiation date was the date of receipt of the reference, 24.03.2023, rather than the respondent's proposed date of 04.09.2024. The court concluded that the penalty order was not issued within the statutory time frame, leading to its invalidation. en-us Wed, 20 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Dec 2024 12:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762736 The court set aside the impugned penalty order issued under the Income Tax Act against the petitioner, a partnership firm, for contravention of Section 269ST, due to it being barred by limitation. The key issue was the interpretation of the initiation date for penalty proceedings under Section 275(1)(c). The court determined that the initiation date was the date of receipt of the reference, 24.03.2023, rather than the respondent's proposed date of 04.09.2024. The court concluded that the penalty order was not issued within the statutory time frame, leading to its invalidation. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762736