Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Penalty under s. 271(1)(c) read with s. 274 was challenged on the ground that the notice did not specify whether the charge was "concealment of income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars of income." Since penalty proceedings are penal in nature, the charge must be unequivocal and unambiguous; the AO is required to strike off the inapplicable limb and cannot club both limbs in the notice. As the AO failed to strike off either limb and left the notice vague, the penalty proceedings were held invalid and the penalty was quashed, granting relief to the taxpayer. - ITAT
Penalty under s. 271(1)(c) read with s. 274 was challenged on the ground that the notice did not specify whether the charge was "concealment of income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars of income." Since penalty proceedings are penal in nature, the charge must be unequivocal and unambiguous; the AO is required to strike off the inapplicable limb and cannot club both limbs in the notice. As the AO failed to strike off either limb and left the notice vague, the penalty proceedings were held invalid and the penalty was quashed, granting relief to the taxpayer. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.