“Section 275(1)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 275Section 275(1)(b)2 judgments

DUBBI GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD,DAUSA vs. ITO WD, DAUSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1283/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR (V.C.)

Section 139Section 144Section 148Section 263Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80P

`आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

P.K.COTTON MILLS PVT. LTD.,,MEERUT vs. PR.CIT, MEERUT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6039/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6039/Del/2017 (A.Y 2008-09) (Through Physical Hearing) P. K. Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pr. Cit C/O. Rra Tax India, D-28, Meerut, South Extension, Part-1, New Uttar Pradesh Delhi Aadcp4270D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 263Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

dated 04.09.2017 • (Del) The Ld. AR further submitted that impugned penalty order passed is barred by limitation in view of the provision of section 275(1)(b) as the penalty order could be passed within 6 months from the end of the month in which revision order was passed ... provided in section 275(1)(b) and as provided in CBDT circular no. 7 of 2003 dated 05.09.2003. The Ld. AR submitted that impugned penalty order has been passed on 25.07.2017 whereas the order of the Tribunal bearing ITA No. 2055/Del/2013 was passed on 18.11.2016 & served