Section 275(1)(a)

Section 275(1)(a) — the law in short

What the courts have decided on section 275(1)(a), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.

• CIT v Worldwide Township Projects Ltd High CourtHelps taxpayer
  The liability was created by a journal entry and no money moved. Does 269SS still apply?
  No. Passing a journal entry does not involve the acceptance of any loan or deposit of money, so s.269SS is not engaged. The Court also held that limitation for a s.271D penalty runs under s.275(1)(c), not s.275(1)(a)(ii).
• CIT v Mohair Investment & Trading Co High CourtHelps departmentSuperseded by amendment
  The CIT(A) order came two years ago but the appeal is still in the Tribunal. Is the penalty already time-barred?
  No. The proviso to s.275(1)(a) does not take away the six months the officer gets from the end of the month in which the Tribunal's order is received. Where successive appeals are filed, the clock in the main limb runs from the final appellate order; the proviso's one-year period from the end of the financial year of receipt of the CIT(A)'s order is an exception for cases that stop at the CIT(A).

Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.