https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56834 Penalty under section 271A was held not to depend on initiation in the assessment order, because that procedural restriction was treated as applicable to section 271 and not to section 271A. The objection to the penalty on that ground therefore failed. Section 44AA(2)(ii) was construed as operating in the alternative: where either the likely income exceeds the prescribed limit or the sales, turnover or gross receipts exceed it, the obligation applies. On the stated facts, the thresholds were exceeded, so the assessee could not avoid penalty. The penalty was substantially sustained, but reduced to the minimum prescribed amount. en-us Thu, 15 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jan 2017 12:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56834 Penalty under section 271A was held not to depend on initiation in the assessment order, because that procedural restriction was treated as applicable to section 271 and not to section 271A. The objection to the penalty on that ground therefore failed. Section 44AA(2)(ii) was construed as operating in the alternative: where either the likely income exceeds the prescribed limit or the sales, turnover or gross receipts exceed it, the obligation applies. On the stated facts, the thresholds were exceeded, so the assessee could not avoid penalty. The penalty was substantially sustained, but reduced to the minimum prescribed amount. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 15 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56834