Penalty for sec. 269SS violation couldn’t imposed after six months of limitation period

By | October 9, 2016
(Last Updated On: October 9, 2016)

Provisions of Section 271-D and 271-E of the Income Tax Act were invoked after six months of limitation and, therefore, such penalty could not have been imposed

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bikaner

v.

Hissaria Brothers, Hanumangarh Jn.

A.K. SIKRI AND ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, JJ.

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5254 OF 2008

AUGUST  22, 2016

Arijit Prasad, Ms. Gargi Khanna and Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Advs. for the Appellant. Ms. Geetanjali Mohan, Adv. for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. On perusing the judgment of the High Court, it is found that penalty imposed on the respondent herein was also set aside on the ground that the provisions of Section 271-D and 271-E of the Income Tax Act were invoked after six months of limitation and, therefore, such penalty could not have been imposed. Since the outcome of the judgment of the High Court can be sustained on this aspect alone, it is not even necessary to go into other aspects. Leaving the other questions of law open, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

2. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

ORDER

1. The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order.

Direct Taxes Ready Reckoner Service Tax Ready Reckoner Company Law Ready Reckoner tax deduction at source
New Books Released on Tax , GST and law

One thought on “Penalty for sec. 269SS violation couldn’t imposed after six months of limitation period

  1. Pingback: Income Tax penalty under New Section 270A of Income Tax Act - Tax Heal

Leave a Reply