<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (12) TMI 1543 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461273</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) requires an independent examination of the assessee&#039;s objections in the penalty proceedings; it cannot be imposed merely because the assessment order was accepted. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer sustained the penalty without addressing the objections raised in the penalty stage and wrongly treated those objections as matters that should have been advanced in assessment proceedings. The commentary states that penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings, and mere acceptance of the assessment order does not by itself justify penalty. It further records that no substantial question of law arose, and the challenge to the penalty failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 20:50:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=809059" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1543 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461273</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) requires an independent examination of the assessee&#039;s objections in the penalty proceedings; it cannot be imposed merely because the assessment order was accepted. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer sustained the penalty without addressing the objections raised in the penalty stage and wrongly treated those objections as matters that should have been advanced in assessment proceedings. The commentary states that penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings, and mere acceptance of the assessment order does not by itself justify penalty. It further records that no substantial question of law arose, and the challenge to the penalty failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461273</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>