Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

1983 (8) TMI 131

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') was issued to him, in response to which he filed a return on 6-10-1977. The ITO, therefore, initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(a) of the Act, in response to which the assessee's contention was that the delay should be calculated after the service of the notice under section 148. The ITO, however, noticed that the assessee had a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h reference to which penalty under section 271(1)(a) had to be worked out was nil and, hence, no penalty could be levied in the present case. In support of this contention it has been argued that the assessed tax on the assessee-firm was only Rs. 5,787, which as a result of our appellate order of date, would further stand reduced. According to the ITO himself, the assessee had paid advance tax and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 50 per cent of the assessed tax at Rs. 19,555. On appeal, the assessee contended that its status has been wrongly determined as an unregistered firm and the Tribunal had already directed grant of registration, in which status the tax payable was only Rs. 1,670, whereas it had paid advance tax of Rs. 1,855. Therefore, it was not liable to pay any tax and, consequently, no penalty could be levied. ....