send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Principle: Ignorance of law excuses no one.
Facts: ‘X’ fails to file his income tax returns for a considerable number of years. The Income Tax department serves upon him a ‘show-cause notice’ as to why proceedings should not be initiated against him for the recovery of the income tax due from him with interest and penalty.
Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?
‘X’ may defend himself by taking the plea that his legal advisor had not advised him to file the return
‘X’ would have to pay the due, as ignorance of law and failure to comply with law is no legal ground of defence
‘X’ may defend himself successfully by taking the plea that he was unaware of any such law being in force(D) None of the above
Clear application of the principle. It does not matter whether Xwas aware of income tax law or not. He was bound to cough up his taxes. Hence, option 2 is the correct answer.
By: SANAT DATT BHARDWAJ ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses