<?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 (8) TMI 1111 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776923</link>
    <description>HC held the penalty order under s.271E was time-barred: limitation under s.275(1)(c) expired on 30.06.2011, and the Revenue could not unilaterally extend limitation by delaying notice. Because the reference was dated 07.06.2011, any notice issued thereafter led to the penalty dated 30.12.2011 being beyond the limitation period. Decision set aside the penalty, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 14:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=844784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 1111 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776923</link>
      <description>HC held the penalty order under s.271E was time-barred: limitation under s.275(1)(c) expired on 30.06.2011, and the Revenue could not unilaterally extend limitation by delaying notice. Because the reference was dated 07.06.2011, any notice issued thereafter led to the penalty dated 30.12.2011 being beyond the limitation period. Decision set aside the penalty, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776923</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>