<?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>2025 (7) TMI 36 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773968</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271B was analysed for limitation under section 275(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The text notes that the penalty notice was issued on 25.12.2019, but the penalty order was passed only on 30.07.2021, beyond the statutory time limit. On that basis, the order is described as having been passed without jurisdiction, barred by limitation, void ab initio, and unsustainable, with the assessee succeeding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2025 08:47:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=832811" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 36 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773968</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271B was analysed for limitation under section 275(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The text notes that the penalty notice was issued on 25.12.2019, but the penalty order was passed only on 30.07.2021, beyond the statutory time limit. On that basis, the order is described as having been passed without jurisdiction, barred by limitation, void ab initio, and unsustainable, with the assessee succeeding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773968</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>