| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 6646 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
Penalty notice issued by AO was bad in law as it did not specify particular limb of section 271(1)(c) under which penalty proceedings had been initiated, i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and, therefore, penalty levied on the basis of such defective notice could not be sustained.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars - Non-specification of particular charge of offence in penalty notice -
Assessee by way of additional grounds raised challenged penalty levied by AO under section 271(1)(c). Assessee's case was that in notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) AO had not mentioned clearly any of twin charges for which penalty proceeding was initiated.Held: Penalty notice issued by AO was bad in law as it did not specify particular limb of section 271(1) (c) under which penalty proceedings had been initiated, i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and, therefore, penalty levied on the basis of such defective notice could not be sustained.
Followed:CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory & Ors. (2014) 359 ITR 565 (Karn-HC) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 0202 (Karn-HC).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2001-02, 2004-05 & 2005-06
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|