Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The ITAT held that the penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) was invalid as the AO failed to strike off the irrelevant limb or indicate the relevant limb in the notice, rendering it mechanically issued and without application of mind. Consequently, the penalty order under section 271(1)(c) was quashed. The Tribunal relied on precedents establishing that a show cause notice must clearly specify the charge-whether concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars-to be valid. In the absence of such specification, the notice is defective, and the penalty cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the penalty order was set aside.
The ITAT held that the penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) was invalid as the AO failed to strike off the irrelevant limb or indicate the relevant limb in the notice, rendering it mechanically issued and without application of mind. Consequently, the penalty order under section 271(1)(c) was quashed. The Tribunal relied on precedents establishing that a show cause notice must clearly specify the charge-whether concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars-to be valid. In the absence of such specification, the notice is defective, and the penalty cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the penalty order was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
