Income Tax

Govt. designates 3 Special Courts in Maharashtra for trial under Income-tax Act

Govt. designates three Special Courts in Maharashtra for trial of offences punishable under the Income-tax Act, 1961

MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Revenue)
(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES)
(INVESTIGATION DIVISION-V)

Notification No. 59/2020 

New Delhi, the 10th August, 2020

S.O.2682(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 280A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and section 84 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (22 of 2015), the Central Government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court of Bombay, hereby designates the following courts of Magistrates of First Class as Special Courts under sub-section (1) of section 280A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and section 84 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 in the State of Maharashtra, for trial of offences punishable under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and other related matters, namely:-

(i) the 38th Court, Ballard Pier for Mumbai region and 31st Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vikhroli for Mumbai including cases at Thane;

(ii) the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur for entire Vidarbha region, and

(iii) the Court of 10th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court No.8), Pune for Pune region.

[F. No 285/30/2019-IT (Inv.V) CBDT]

DEEPAK TIWARI,
Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) (INV.)

Download Notification Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • FCRA

FCRA specifies list of 105 purposes to be selected for which registration is applied

FCRA specifies list of purposes to be selected for which registration is applied.  The Ministry of Home Affairs has notified…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Withholding tax u/s 40(a)(i) not required on cost-to-cost reimbursement made to parent company

Assessee was not liable to withhold tax at source u/s 40(a)(i) on cost-to-cost reimbursement made to parent company In a…

2 days ago
  • Government

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App not disproportionate – Delhi High Court

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App under section 69A of IT Act 2000 is not disproportionate - Delhi HC…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA to means a project or an undertaking owned…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash not owner who came up to own it

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash and the real owner had come forward owning the cash…

7 days ago
  • RTI

Lokayukta Police not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 – SC

Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation  and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…

1 week ago