Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Defective notice issued u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) for levying penalty. The key points are: The phrases "conceal" and "furnishing of inaccurate particulars" in Section 271(1)(c) carry distinct meanings. Where penalty proceedings are initiated u/s 271(1)(c), the specific ground must be clearly spelled out to provide the assessee a proper opportunity for defense. Penalty proceedings being penal in nature, the charge must be unambiguous. The revenue cannot club both grounds of concealment and furnishing inaccurate particulars. Following judicial precedents, the Tribunal rightly held that the penalty levy u/s 271(1)(c) in the assessee's case was invalid due to the defective notice.
Defective notice issued u/s 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) for levying penalty. The key points are: The phrases "conceal" and "furnishing of inaccurate particulars" in Section 271(1)(c) carry distinct meanings. Where penalty proceedings are initiated u/s 271(1)(c), the specific ground must be clearly spelled out to provide the assessee a proper opportunity for defense. Penalty proceedings being penal in nature, the charge must be unambiguous. The revenue cannot club both grounds of concealment and furnishing inaccurate particulars. Following judicial precedents, the Tribunal rightly held that the penalty levy u/s 271(1)(c) in the assessee's case was invalid due to the defective notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
