Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Section 271B

Sec. 260A, Section 271, Section 271B, Section 273B

Punjab & Haryana H.C : These appeals is relating to the penalty imposed under s. 271B of the Act for violation of the provisions of s. 44AB

Avijit Das / February 1, 2008

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Mathana Model Co-Op. Credit & Service Society Ltd. Section 260A, 271B, 273B […]

Sec. 275(1)(b), Section 271B, Section 275

Allahabad H.C : The penalty imposed under s. 271B on 23rd Oct., 1990, was not barred by limitation in view of the provisions of s. 275

Avijit Das / July 13, 2007

High Court Of Allahabad Bhola Nath Carpets (P) Ltd. vs. CIT Section 271B, 275(1)(b) Asst. Year 1986-87 R.K. Agrawal &

Sec. 44AB, Section 271, Section 271B, Section 273B

Madras H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty imposed under s. 271B of the IT Act for the asst. yr. 2001-02 was not proper ?

Avijit Das / June 9, 2007

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. L.S. Lakshmanaswamy Section 44AB, 271B, 273B Asst. Year 2001-02 P.D. Dinakaran & P.P.S. Janarthana

Sec. 271A, Section 271, Section 271B

Allahabad H.C : Question does not arise of getting the account audited as the assessee was not maintaining any books of account ignoring the fact that s. 44AB is a separate and mandatory provision and has no interlink with s. 44AA

Avijit Das / May 18, 2007

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Bisauli Tractors Section 271A, 271B Asst. Year 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90 R.K. Agrawal & Bharati

Section 271, Section 271B

Allahabad H.C : No penalty under the said section is exigible for failure to furnish the audit report along with the return under s. 139(1) of the same is furnished along with the return filed by the assessee under s. 139(4) of the IT Act, 1961

Avijit Das / April 9, 2007

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Gulzari Lal Agrawal & Sons Section 271B Asst. Year 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93 R.K. Agrawal

Section 271B, Section 275

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of s. 271B r/w s. 275 of the IT Act, 1961, the learned Tribunal had erred in law in holding that penalty proceeding under s. 271B can be initiated after completion of the assessment proceedings ?

Avijit Das / November 22, 2006

High Court Of Gauhati Assam State Warehousing Corporation vs. CIT & ANR. Sections 271B, 275 Asst. Year 1988-89 D. Biswas

Section 271, Section 271B, Section 273B

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ignoring the relevant materials, namely, auditor’s letter dt. 5th June, 1991, before it was justified and did not err in holding that there was no reasonable cause for the delay in submitting the audit report by the assessee and this pass a perverse order ?

Avijit Das / October 30, 2006

High Court Of Gauhati Khuda Wood Products (P) Ltd. vs. CIT Section 271B, 273B D. Biswas & U.B. Saha, JJ.

Sec. 44AB, Section 271B, Section 273B

Karnataka H.C : Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that penalty under s. 271B of the Act was exigible for the belated audit reports under s. 44AB of the Act in spite of the fact that the audit reports were obtained and enclosed along with the returns filed by the appellant ?

Avijit Das / October 16, 2006

High Court Of Karnataka Saraswathi Electronics vs. ITO Sections 44AB, 271B, 273B Asst. Years 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95 R. Gururajan

Section 271B, Section 271E

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was right in law in upholding the deletion of penalty under s. 271E by the CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee company was under a bona fide belief that the limit of Rs. 20,000 for accepting a deposit was in force in the year under consideration where the law specifically provided the cut off date as 1st April, 1989 ?

Avijit Das / September 11, 2006

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Avet Chemicals (P) Ltd. Sections 271E, 273B Adarsh Kumar Goel & Ajay

Sec. 275(1)(c), Section 271B, Section 275

Karnataka H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the penalty proceedings initiated on 8th June, 1993 and completed on 15th Dec., 1993 were beyond the period of limitation ?

Avijit Das / July 18, 2006

High Court Of Karnataka CIT vs. Tam Tam Pedda Guruva Reddy Sections 271B, 275(1)(c) Asst. Year 1991-92 R. Gururajan &

Post pagination

← Previous 1 2 3 … 5 Next →

Copyright © 2024 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top