Penalty notice must specify the exact Section 270A limb; vague notice invalidates the penalty proceedings.

Penalty under Section 270A was held unsustainable because the notice initiating penalty proceedings did not specify whether the alleged default was under-reporting or misreporting. The Tribunal treated this defect as material, holding that a valid notice must identify the precise limb of the statutory default; otherwise the penalty initiation and the resulting levy fail. The assessee's prior payment of self-assessment tax on the admitted additional income also supported the bona fides noted by the first appellate authority. The deletion of penalty was therefore affirmed, and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Section 270A was sustainable when the notice did not specify the particular limb of under-reporting or misreporting alleged against the assessee.

Analysis: The penalty was deleted on the ground that the notice issued for penalty proceedings did not pinpoint any specific clause within Section 270A(2), and the defect was treated as material to the validity of the proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had already paid self-assessment tax on the admitted additional income before filing the return, which supported the bona fides recorded by the first appellate authority. Relying on the view that a penalty notice must clearly indicate the precise default alleged, the Tribunal held that the absence of a specified limb vitiated the penalty initiation and the consequent levy.

Conclusion: The penalty under Section 270A was held unsustainable and the deletion was affirmed in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge to the cancellation of penalty failed, and the assessee retained the benefit of the deletion of penalty proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: A penalty notice under Section 270A must clearly specify the particular limb of the alleged default, and failure to do so renders the penalty proceedings unsustainable.

---