TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal emphasizes notice requirements in penalty proceedings under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>M/s Hindon River Mills Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle-1, Ghaziabad</h3> M/s Hindon River Mills Ltd. Versus DCIT, Circle-1, Ghaziabad - TMI Issues:Challenge against imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Admission of Additional GroundsThe appellant challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) and sought admission of additional grounds raising legal issues. The Tribunal admitted the grounds as they were crucial to the penalty matter, emphasizing that no new investigation was required, and they were fundamental to the case.Issue 2: Validity of Penalty NoticeThe appellant contended that the penalty notice was defective as it did not specify the charge under which penalty was imposed, violating the requirement of section 271(1)(c). Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal noted that failure to specify the charge makes the penalty order liable for cancellation, despite evidence of income concealment. The Tribunal upheld the argument, emphasizing the necessity of specifying the charge for penalty imposition.Issue 3: Compliance with Legal RequirementsThe Assessing Officer argued that penalty proceedings were validly initiated, but the Tribunal found the notice deficient as it did not specify the limb of section 271(1)(c) under which penalty was imposed. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty notice was legally flawed, leading to the deletion of the penalty and setting aside the CIT(A)'s order.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of complying with legal requirements in penalty proceedings. The penalty notice's failure to specify the charge under section 271(1)(c) rendered the penalty order invalid, resulting in its deletion. The Tribunal's decision highlighted the significance of proper notice in penalty imposition under the Income Tax Act, ultimately favoring the appellant in this case.
TaxTMI 