Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.25 seconds)
Amd Research & Development Center India ... vs Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 4 March, 2022
cites
Section 246 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 253 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Mohair Investment And Trading ... on 6 March, 2014
ITA Nos 63 to 66 of 2018 AMD R&D Centre India P Ltd Bangalore
11.6 CIT vs. Mohair Investment & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. [245
CTR 312J. It was held that from the plain reading of the
relevant section, it is clear that the period of six months
provided for imposition of penalty u/s. 275(1)(a) starts running
after the successive appeals from an assessment order, has
been finally decided by the CIT(A) or the Tribunal as the case
may be whichever period expires later.
Section 246A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 271D in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commnr. Of Customs (Import), Mumbai vs M/S. Dilip Kumar And Company on 30 July, 2018
2. It emerges at the outset that we hardly need to delve much
deeper in the relevant factual matrix of the assessees first and foremost
legal ground herein that the learned lower appellate authorities have
erred in law and on facts in imposing the impugned penalties beyond
the time limit prescribed in section 275 (1)(a) of the Act. There is hardly
any dispute that we are dealing with penalty provision in a fiscal
statute herein which deserves to be put to strict interpretation only in
light of the Hon'ble Apex Court recent landmark judgment in Commnr.
Of Customs vs M/S. Dilip Kumar And Company (2018) 9 SCC 1
(S.C)(FB).
The Finance Act, 2018
Rayala Corporation P. Ltd. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 5 April, 2006
ITA Nos 63 to 66 of 2018 AMD R&D Centre India P Ltd Bangalore
23.06.2017 submitted that there was another show cause
notice issued on 21.03.2013 and the notice issued on
30.04.2015 is second show cause notice and again relied on
the provisions of Section 275(1)(a) and stated that provisions
of Section 275(1)(c) are not applicable. These written
submissions were again forwarded to the Assessing Officer for
a factual report. The Assessing Officer vide letter d t. 21.
07.2017 submitted that the order of the CIT(A) was received in
the Office of the CIT (IT &TP) on 31 .05.2014 and according to
Section 275(I)(a), the last date for passing of order is
31.03.2016 and as the order was passed on 30.10.2015 itself,
it is well within the time allowed by the statute. The second
remand report was forwarded to the appellant for a rejoinder,
if any. The appellant again relied on the provisions of Section
275(1)(a) and as the appellant filed an appeal before Hon'ble
ITAT, the time limit of 6 months from the end of the month in
which the order of Hon'ble ITAT is received in the 0/0. CIT and
relied on the decisions of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the
case of CIT vs. Mohair Investment and Trading Co. P.
Ltd.[2011J (ITA No. 511/2011) and on the decision of Madras
High Court in the case of Rayala Corporation P. Ltd. vs. Union
of India (UOI) and Ors. (2007) 288 ITR 452.