Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
