The penalty notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was defective ...

Tax notice defect: Penalty for concealment/inaccuracy not specified - Fatal flaw renders penalty void.

Case Laws Income Tax

November 12, 2024

The penalty notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was defective as it did not specify whether the penalty proceedings were initiated for concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. When the charge is not specified in the notice, it is considered an omnibus notice. The Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. and the Bombay High Court in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh (Full Bench) held that the penalty order passed without specifying the charge in the notice is liable to be quashed due to this fatal defect. Consequently, the penalty in this case is liable to be deleted in favor of the assessee.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The penalty notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was defective ...

Tax notice defect: Penalty for concealment/inaccuracy not specified - Fatal flaw renders penalty void.

Case Laws Income Tax

November 12, 2024

You may also like:

The assessee challenged the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) for short credit of sale consideration received from the sale of copyrights and cable rights. The issue...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective notice u/s 274 - The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for such notices to clearly delineate the charge against the assessee, allowing...

Penalty u/s 271 - Defective notice - the allegation should be specific and clear in the penalty notice also because the assessee has to submit reply in the course of...

The ITAT Surat held that the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to a defective notice and estimation of income on bogus purchases. The notice u/s 274 was...

Penalty u/s 271AAB - Defects in the notice issued u/s 274 - CIT(A) reduced the penalty to 10% applying provisions of Section 271AAB(a) of the Act as against penalty...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Penalty order did not specify the particular limb under which penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is levied. AO has not specified that penalty is either levied...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - Emphasizing the principles outlined by the Karnataka High Court, the Tribunal reaffirmed the importance of...

Assessment order passed without issuing notice u/s 143(2) after considering assessee's return is illegal and liable to be set aside, as non-issuance of Section 143(2)...

Limitation Period for issuance of notice u/s 143(2) - Scrutiny Assessment - Relevant date - after filing of the return of income, defect notice u/s 139(9) had been sent...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - failure to file the income tax return - Merely for non-specifying in the notice as to under which limb the penalty is levied i.e., for...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - validity of show cause notice issued - The ITAT emphasized the legal necessity for the AO to clearly specify the nature of the default—whether...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - cash deposit - defective notice - notice is stereo typed printed notice in which either of the clauses as to whether penalty was invoked for...

Validity of Assessment / Demand Order - The High court found that the assessment order was flawed due to non-application of mind by the assessing officer. - The...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It was questioned whether a precise charge was brought against the assessee and if the...

The ITAT Mumbai considered a case involving a penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal found the...

Quick Updates: