sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
News Headlines »
 How to file different categories of ITR forms online Income tax e-filing
 Here are other documents you need to file online ITR Got your Form-16 for FY18?
 10 must have documents to file your tax return
 Know all about how to file ITR FY 2017-18
 Government extends sale of pre-GST goods with stickers of revised price till July 31
 All 7 ITR forms for assessment year 2018-19 activated for e-filing: Income Tax Department
 Check if new salary structure is income tax efficient
 GST refund drive extended till June 16
 5 income tax returns filing mistakes you must avoid
 Your complete guide to file income tax return
 Input Tax Credit refund drive till June 14

No penalty to be levied in absence of any tax liability: SC
February, 10th 2007

The Supreme Court has held that Income Tax department cannot impose any penalty on an assesses in the absence of any positive income and tax liability prior to the amendment by Finance Act 2002.

"Prior to the amendment by the Finance Act 2002, in the absence of any positive income and no tax being levied, penalty for concealment of income cannot be levied," a bench of Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice Dalveer Bhandari said.

According to the court, there was nothing in the language of Section 271(1)(C) as amended by the Finance Act 2002 with effect from April 1, 2003 to suggest that the amendment was retrospective.

The amendment enlarged the scope of the penalty to include even cases where assessment had been completed at loss, it added.

"The same being in the nature of a substantive amendment would be prospective, in the absence of any indication to the contrary," the bench said.

The statute creating the penalty is the first and last consideration and must be construed within the term and language of the particular statute, it added.

With this judgement the apex court has set aside the Delhi High Court order that held that the income tax tribunal was not right in deleting the penalty imposed on virtual soft systems under Section 271(1)(C) merely on the ground that the total income of the assessee was assessed at a minus figure/loss.

The High Court had held that it was not necessary that there must be a positive income and the levy of tax for imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act after April 1, 1976.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
E-catalogue online catalogue E-brochure online brochure online product catalogue online product catalogue e-catalogue Indi

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions