Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
ITAT held that penalty under s.270A was unsustainable and set aside because the AO, in the s.274 notice and penalty order, failed to specify the precise default-whether "under-reporting" or "under-reporting as a consequence of misreporting"-each attracting distinct penal consequences and rates; issuance of a notice alleging both distinct defaults rendered the proceedings void ab initio. Given the absence of identification of the exact charge, the penalty could not be validly levied. Accordingly, the assessee's appeal was allowed and the penalty order annulled.
ITAT held that penalty under s.270A was unsustainable and set aside because the AO, in the s.274 notice and penalty order, failed to specify the precise default-whether "under-reporting" or "under-reporting as a consequence of misreporting"-each attracting distinct penal consequences and rates; issuance of a notice alleging both distinct defaults rendered the proceedings void ab initio. Given the absence of identification of the exact charge, the penalty could not be validly levied. Accordingly, the assessee's appeal was allowed and the penalty order annulled.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
