Broker trading-system "technical glitch" redefinition and narrowed incident-reporting regime for large IBT/STWT brokers requiring 2-hr notice and 14-w...
ITAT held that repeated non-compliances of multiple notices issued u/s 142(1) on the same subject constitute a single default for purposes of penalty u/s 271(1)(b). Accepting the assessee's plea, the Tribunal ruled that successive notices seeking identical information do not multiply the default. Applying s. 273B, it upheld penalty only for the first non-compliance and deleted penalty for the remaining four instances. The penalty was thus restricted to Rs. 10,000 for one default instead of five, and the assessee's appeal was partly allowed.
ITAT held that repeated non-compliances of multiple notices issued u/s 142(1) on the same subject constitute a single default for purposes of penalty u/s 271(1)(b). Accepting the assessee's plea, the Tribunal ruled that successive notices seeking identical information do not multiply the default. Applying s. 273B, it upheld penalty only for the first non-compliance and deleted penalty for the remaining four instances. The penalty was thus restricted to Rs. 10,000 for one default instead of five, and the assessee's appeal was partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
