ITAT held that the appellate authority's assumption of...

ITAT held that the appellate authority's assumption of jurisdiction to invoke penalty under section 271(1)(c) was without legal competence and consequently the show-cause notice and resultant penalty order issued by the appellate authority were quashed. The tribunal found that the essential statutory requirement of recording a valid satisfaction and identification of the specific limb of section 271(1)(c) was not fulfilled, rendering the penalty proceedings vitiated ab initio. Since the assessing officer had not specified the applicable limb in the original penalty notice, the appellate re-characterisation could not cure the defect; the penalty under section 271AAB was accordingly deleted and the substituted 271(1)(c) proceedings set aside.