This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Validity of penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c ) for disallowance of expenses u/s 35D
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- The Commissioner of Income Tax-III Vs M/s.Aditya Birla Nova Limited (Successor) (Bombay High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All High Courts, Bombay High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Merely because the assessee had claimed the expenditure, which claim was not accepted or was not acceptable to the Revenue, that by itself would not, in our opinion, attract the penalty under Section 271(1)(c). If we accept the contention of the Revenue then in case of every return where the claim made is not accepted by the assessing officer for any reason, the assessee will invite penalty under Section 271(1)( c ) . That is clearly not the intendment of the legislature. In any event we are bound by the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd… Merely bec...
