Search: penalty u/s 271

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 246clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)10 Penalty3 Addition to Income3 Section 143(3)2 Section 2752

M/S KASHMIR STEEL ROLLING MILLS,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 548/ASR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 548/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

u/s. 271(1)(c). This is precisely what stands clarified by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Madhushree Gupta & Ors v. Union of India [2009] 317 ITR 107 (Del), a copious decision rendered under writ jurisdiction on a challenge to the vires of the provision (section 271(1B)). Upholding its’ constitutionality, it again emphasized on the primacy

M/S KASHMIR STEEL ROLLING MILLS,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

SHRI H.K. GANDOTRA,GURGAON vs. THE INOCME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

M/S KASHMIR STEEL ROLLING MILLS,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

SHRI H.K. GANDOTRA,GURGAON vs. THE INOCME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

SH. MANINDER SINGH PROP. M/S DASHMESH BRICKS,BATHINDA vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA