Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

In the presentcase, as observed earlier, the assessee not only responded to the notice under Section 148 of the Act within one month, but on the basis of the return filed earlier, participated in the proceedings till the matter reached the FAA and was disposed of. A glance at Section 292B of the Act, shows that under this provision, certain Acts are not to be treated as invalid, may be by reason of any mistake, defect or omissions, either in return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceedings. In other words, a notice cannot be invalidated by reason of any mistake, such as the one occurred in the presentcase, namely, the period of filing return of income was not specified as contemplated by Section 148 of the Act. If such a defect is not allowed to be cured, or treated as invalid so as to declare the notice invalid, despite the fact that assessee had taken that notice as valid and responded to it in letter and spirit and participated in the proceedings, the very purpose/objective of the provisions contained in Section 292B of the Act would stand frustrated/defeated.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Penalty – Concealment Penalty – Wherever assessee failed to rebut the factual position on the basis of which addition was made, the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) was justified. Thus, it was a clear case of concealment, the AO had rightly levied penalty under section 271(1)(c) – Muthukumaran Rangarajan v Income tax Officer [2020] 77 ITR (trib) 421(Chennai)

Professional services available Audit Management
Tax Lok English Viedo
Tax Lok Hindi Viedo
Check Your Tax Knowledge
Youtube
HR Consulting services

FOR FREE CONDUCTED TOUR OF OUR ON-LINE LIBRARIES WITH OUR REPRESENTATIVE-- CLICK HERE

FOR ANY SUPPORT ON GST/INCOME TAX

Do You Want To Take FREE DEMO Of Our GST/Income Tax Library.