Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

Penalty Orders Under Sections 271(1)(c) and 270A Quashed for Being Beyond Six-Month Limitation Period

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The ITAT held that penalty orders under sections 271(1)(c) and 270A for the assessment years 2014-15 to 2018-19 were barred by limitation under section 275(1)(c) of the Act. Since the penalties were imposed beyond six months from the end of the month in which penalty proceedings were initiated, such orders are illegal, void ab initio, and bad in law. Consequently, the penalties for concealment and underreporting of income were quashed. The assessee's appeal was allowed on the ground of limitation, consistent with the precedent that penalty orders passed after the prescribed limitation period are invalid.....