| COURT: | ITAT Delhi |
| CORAM: | Kuldip Singh (JM), N. K. Saini (AM) |
| SECTION(S): | 271(1)(c), 271AAA |
| GENRE: | domes |
| CATCH WORDS: | concelment Penalty |
| COUNSEL: | Salil Kapoor |
| DATE: | May 19, 2016 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | May 28, 2016 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2008-09 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 271(1)(c) vs. 271AAA: Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on income disclosed in a search instead of u/s 271AAA is not sustainable | |
The penalty in this case, if at all leviable, it should have been levied under section 271AAA (1) and not u/s 271(1)(c) as has categorically been provided in sub-section (3) of section 271AAA. Intention of the legislative in incorporating the provisions contained u/s 271AA effective during the period 1st June, 2007 to 1st July, 2012 is to provide general amnesty in search and seizure cases, and the case of the assessee undisputedly falls u/s 271AAA and cannot be dealt with u/s 271(1)(c) by any stretch of imagination even
Recent Comments