Search: penalty u/s 271

2 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 48clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 2637 Section 153A7 Section 41(1)4 Section 143(3)2 Section 133(6)2

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 289/RAN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi08 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Ran/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Padam Kumar Jain Vs. Cit, Central, Cr Building, Beer Chand Patel Marg, Patna – 800001. Ratanlalsurajmal Compound, Main Road, Ranchi – 834001, Jharkhand "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abrpj 0001 E (Assessee) .. (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Chaudhury & Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Inderjeet Singh, CIT (DR)

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Income tax Act, 1961 may be (in addition to tax, if any payable) imposed for a sum of ten thousand rupees for each such failure.” We note thatwhile making the second assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Act, the following issues were examined by the assessing officer: (i).Incentive on sales

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

PADAM KUMAE JAIN,RANCHI vs. CIT, CENTRAL, PATNA

ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI vs. SHRI SUMIT RAMSISARIA, RANCHI