Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. v. Assessment Unit [2025] 180 taxmann.com 186 (Bom) (HC)

S. 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Bar of limitation for imposition-Pendency of quantum of appeal before Tribunal-Under section 275 as it stood prior to 1-4-2025, penalty order could not be passed during pendency of appeal against quantum assessment before ITAT; accordingly, ad-interim relief was granted restraining Revenue from taking any steps pursuant to penalty order. [S.254(1), 275(1)(a), Art. 226]

Where penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated during pendency of assessee’s appeal against quantum assessment before the Tribunal and the Assessing Officer subsequently imposed a penalty of about Rs. 101 crores while such appeal was pending, under section 275 as it stood prior to 1-4-2025, a penalty order could not be passed during pendency of appeal against quantum assessment before ITAT; accordingly, ad-interim relief was granted restraining Revenue from taking any steps pursuant to the penalty order. Followed: R.B. Shreeram Durgaprasad v. CIT [2016] 237 Taxmann 189 (Bom)(HC) 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*