![Penalty u/s 96ZP of Excise Act not justifiable when Revenue Department delayed Computation of ACP: Orissa HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Penalty-Excise-Act-Revenue-Department-ACP-Orissa-HC-TAXSCAN.jpg "Penalty u/s 96ZP of Excise Act not justifiable when Revenue Department delayed Computation of ACP: Orissa HC [Read Order]")
Penalty u/s 96ZP of Excise Act not justifiable when Revenue Department delayed Computation of ACP: Orissa HC [Read Order]
In a recent ruling, the Orissa High Court (HC) held that the penalty under section 96ZP of the Central Excise Act was not justifiable when Revenue...
![Additional Special Road Taxes are Regulatory and Compensatory in Nature, not a Penalty: Supreme Court [Read Judgment]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/special-road-taxes-road-taxes-taxes-penalty-SC-Supreme-Court-taxscan.jpg "Additional Special Road Taxes are Regulatory and Compensatory in Nature, not a Penalty: Supreme Court [Read Judgment]")
![Commissioner (Appeals) has No Jurisdiction to issue SCN u/s73 of Finance Act, Order confirming demand of Interest and Penalty is not valid: CESTAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Commissioner-SCN-Finance-Act-Order-demand-of-Interest-demand-Penalty-Interest-CESTAT-Order-confirming-demand-taxscan.jpg "Commissioner (Appeals) has No Jurisdiction to issue SCN u/s73 of Finance Act, Order confirming demand of Interest and Penalty is not valid: CESTAT [Read Order]")
![‘NOC’ not required to be obtained from Drug Inspector and Free to Export Drugs, Penalty under Customs Act not imposable: CESTAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/NOC-Drug-Export-Drugs-Penalty-Customs-Act-CESTAT-TAXSCAN.jpg "‘NOC’ not required to be obtained from Drug Inspector and Free to Export Drugs, Penalty under Customs Act not imposable: CESTAT [Read Order]")
![Delivery of Goods to Different Location Not Mentioned in E-Way Bill to Attract Maximum Penalty: Tamilnadu Govt. Issues instructions to GST Officers [Read Circular]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Delivery-of-Goods-Delivery-of-Goods-to-Different-Location-E-Way-Bill-Penalty-GST-Officers-GST-taxscan.jpg "Delivery of Goods to Different Location Not Mentioned in E-Way Bill to Attract Maximum Penalty: Tamilnadu Govt. Issues instructions to GST Officers [Read Circular]")
Mere not Selling of Old Batteries on Weight Basis does not attract Penalty under GST Law: Allahabad HC [Read Order]
A Single bench of the Allahabad High Court has recently held that not selling old batteries on weight measurement basis instead of piece rate does not make the seller liable to be penalised under the...
![Mere not Selling of Old Batteries on Weight Basis does not attract Penalty under GST Law: Allahabad HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Selling-of-Old-Batteries-Old-Batteries-penalty-GST-law-penalty-under-GST-law-Allahabad-High-Court-GST-Taxscan.jpg "Mere not Selling of Old Batteries on Weight Basis does not attract Penalty under GST Law: Allahabad HC [Read Order]")
Addition under Deeming Provision of S. 50C cannot Attract Income Tax Penalty for 'Concealment of Income': ITAT [Read Order]
In an assessee-favouring ruling, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad bench has held that the addition under section 50C, being a deeming provision cannot be a sole ground to attract...
![Addition under Deeming Provision of S. 50C cannot Attract Income Tax Penalty for Concealment of Income: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Deeming-Provision-Income-Tax-Penalty-Income-ITAT-TAXSCAN.jpg "Addition under Deeming Provision of S. 50C cannot Attract Income Tax Penalty for Concealment of Income: ITAT [Read Order]")
Absence of Corroborative Evidence on Misclassification as Ingredients to invoke Extended Period of Limitation u/s 11A, No Penalty: CESTAT [Read Order]
The Eastern Zonal Kolkata bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate (CESTAT) held that lack of corroborative evidence on misclassification can be an ingredient to invoke a period of...
![Absence of Corroborative Evidence on Misclassification as Ingredients to invoke Extended Period of Limitation u/s 11A, No Penalty: CESTAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/corroborative-evidence-penalty-CESTAT-taxscan.jpeg "Absence of Corroborative Evidence on Misclassification as Ingredients to invoke Extended Period of Limitation u/s 11A, No Penalty: CESTAT [Read Order]")
Ex parte Assessment Order passed in Violation of Principles of Natural Justice, entails Civil Consequences: Patna HC [Read Order]
The Patna High Court (HC) ruled that Ex parte assessment order passed in violation of principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. The petitioner, Pravin Kumar approached the High...
![Ex parte Assessment Order passed in Violation of Principles of Natural Justice, entails Civil Consequences: Patna HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Ex-parte-Ex-parte-Assessment-Order-Assessment-Order-Violation-of-Principles-of-Natural-Justice-Natural-Justice-Civil-Consequences-Patna-High-Court-taxscan.jpg "Ex parte Assessment Order passed in Violation of Principles of Natural Justice, entails Civil Consequences: Patna HC [Read Order]")
Penalty u/s 271AAA can be Imposed When Assessee accepted Undisclosed Income in section 132(4) statement: ITAT [Read Order]
The Delhi bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that penalty under section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act can be imposed when the assessee accepted undisclosed income in the...
![Penalty u/s 271AAA can be Imposed When Assessee accepted Undisclosed Income in section 132(4) statement: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Penalty-Undisclosed-Income-statement-ITAT-TAXSCAN.jpg "Penalty u/s 271AAA can be Imposed When Assessee accepted Undisclosed Income in section 132(4) statement: ITAT [Read Order]")
Relief to Nagarjuna Oil Corporation, Section 271(1)(c) Penalty cannot be imposed on debatable issue: ITAT [Read Order]
As a relief to Nagarjuna Oil corporation, the Chennai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) has held that Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,1961 penalty cannot be imposed on a...
![Relief to Nagarjuna Oil Corporation, Section 271(1)(c) Penalty cannot be imposed on debatable issue: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Nagarjuna-Oil-Corporation-Nagarjuna-Oil-Penalty-debatable-issue-ITAT-taxscan-.jpg "Relief to Nagarjuna Oil Corporation, Section 271(1)(c) Penalty cannot be imposed on debatable issue: ITAT [Read Order]")
Distributorship Contracts Alone would not Attract Penalty for Cash Transaction Exceeding Rs. 2 Lakh for Co-operative Societies: CBDT [Read Circular]
The Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT ) has issued an instruction clarifying that the provisions of section 269ST of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the imposition of penalty for cash transactions...
![Distributorship Contracts Alone would not Attract Penalty for Cash Transaction Exceeding Rs. 2 Lakh for Co-operative Societies: CBDT [Read Circular]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Distributorship-Contracts-Penalty-Cash-Transaction-Co-operative-Societies-CBDT-taxscan.jpg "Distributorship Contracts Alone would not Attract Penalty for Cash Transaction Exceeding Rs. 2 Lakh for Co-operative Societies: CBDT [Read Circular]")