Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.21 seconds)Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Shree Raghunath Cotton Ginning And Oil ... on 26 October, 2004
"21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the
penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which was
accepted b y the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka
High Court in CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359
565 (Kar) and observed that the notice issued by the Assessing
Officer would be bad in law if it did not specify which limb of
Section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated
under i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or
for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Ssa'S Emerald Meadows on 5 August, 2016
The
Karnataka High Court had followed the above judgment in the
subsequent order in CIT vs. SSA's Emerald Meadows (2016) 73
Taxman.com 241 (Kar.), the appeal against which was
dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP No.
11485 of 2016 by order dated 5th August, 2016.
Section 271 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 275 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
1