Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : ACIT Vs Sumit P. Bhattacharya (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 1998- 99
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Merely because a legal claim has been made, and even though the said claim has been found to be inadmissible, penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed ACIT Vs Sumit P. Bhattacharya (ITAT Mumbai)- Assessee was an employee of M/s Procter and Gamble India Ltd., which is a group company of Procter and Gamble of USA. The company had given appreciation rights to the assessee. As regards the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Dharmender Textiles, 306 ITR 307, we find that CIT(A) as well as ITAT have not cancelled penalty on the ground of mens rea, therefore, the j...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930