...opinion, the case would be covered by the rule in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC). We are, accordingly, of the opinion that...levied, the penalty imposed was clearly justified. 3. In Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa [1972] 83 ITR 26, the...1. The following question has been referred to us for our opinion : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the...

...98 by the Bombay High Court. In that case, it was observed that the penalty proceedings are criminal proceedings in their very nature. In Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case, [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) it...Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State Of Orissa†., [1972] 83 ITR 26 : [1970] 25 STC 211. It is..., [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC) was a case under s. 28(1)(c) of the Indian I.T Act, 1922, which provided for penalties where the assessee concealed the particulars of his income or...

...Division Bench of this court applied the principles enunciated in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case, [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC), to sub...in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case, [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) and Elestone Estate's case...section exist.24. In Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case, [1972] 83 ITR 26, the Supreme Court considering the scope of levy of penalty under section 9(1) read with section 25...

...these cases was under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The learned judges noticed the decision of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case [1972] 83 ITR 26 SC. and...warrant the wholesale transplantation of elements of deliberation and design stressed by the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case with respect to section 28(1)(c) of the 1922.... Inland Revenue Commissioners’.”27. And then proceeded to quote from Anwar Ali's case and Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case. We feel that the observations of the Division Bench that...

...section 273(c). The provisions under the Orissa Sales Tax Act considered in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case, [1972] 83 ITR 26 SC) were...obligation. Reliance was placed on Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State Of Orissa†., [1972] 83 ITR 26, 29 (SC...law of the land has been clearly spelt out by the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel's case, [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) and Anwar Ali's case...

..., the aforesaid ratio in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case, [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) case...Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State Of Orissa†., [1972] 83 ITR 26...the conduct of the assessee. Even in the absence of the provisions like section 273B, which aptly governs the present case, the ratio of the Supreme Court decision in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case...

..., only legal grounds were taken and the cause of not furnishing the return within time was not disclosed. He was, therefore, guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest. In the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd., [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) the breach of the provisions of the Act was held to be technical or venial, but in the instant case it was neither technical nor venial. Therefore, Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case...Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State Of Orissa†., [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC), one of the questions referred to the High Court was “whether...assessee on two decisions of the Supreme court in Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State Of Orissa†., [1972] 83 ITR 26 and...

...quote false PAN. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion, the aforesaid ratio in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) case...Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State Of Orissa†. [1972] 83 ITR 26...upheld by the ld. CIT(A). He added that on identical facts, the ld. CIT(A) vide his order dated 07.10.2001 in Appeal No.136/2008-09 in the case of M/s Packcraft Container India Pvt. Ltd., cancelled...

...circumstances of the case, in our opinion, the aforesaid ratio in Hindustan Steel Ltd.'s case [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) case...Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State Of Orissa . [1972] 83 ITR 26; [1970] 25 STC...placed on the order dated 07.10.2009 passed by my Ld. predecessor in appeal No. 136/2008- 09 in the case of Packraft Container India Pvt. Ltd. for A.Y.2008-09 in which penalty...

...of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v/s State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) and held as under: 4 „"In the instant case, there...on decision of the Hon"ble Supreme court in Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa[1972] 83 ITR 26 wherein it has been held as...Jharkhand High Court in the case of OMEC Engineers v/s. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 599 (Jharkhand), referred to decision in the case...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...

...circumstances of the case. 8. In the case of M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26(SC...M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa reported in 83 ITR 26(SC). ITA No.437 to 440/Mds/2015 6...the learned Assessing Officer was of the view that it is a fit case to levy penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly levied penalty of `1,42,651/- and Rs. 1,41,131/- for the assessment...