Case Law Details
Case Name : C.I.T. Vs Madan Teatres Ltd. (Calcutta High Court)
Related Assessment Year :
Courts :
All High Courts Calcutta High Court
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
The assessee sold the property at a sum of Rs.2,51,50,000/- For the purpose of stamp duty, however, the value was estimated at a sum of Rs.5, 19,77,000/- and on that basis the stamp duty was realized. During the assessment, it was found that the assessee had disclosed the sale price at a sum of Rs.2,51,50,000/-. The Assessing Officer fixed the sale price at a sum of Rs 5,19,77,000/ – and started proceedings under Section 271(1) (C). Penalty for a sum of Rs.30,09,989/-was imposed.
The assessee preferred an appeal with CIT(A). CIT(A) allowed the appeal and set aside the order imposing pen...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Good the Revenue advocate rightly assisted the assessee by providing the provision of deemed value, and revenue need to show the excess amount realized, that is the duty of any advocate to the courts as court officer, though he might be on panel of revenue that does not mean he has to fail in his duty to court. Kudos to adv . Niamuddin. that is how obligations of any governance should be by any government that is the principle of rule of law. will the governments and public servants would so behave with accountability is a millions of $ question today!