Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was examined on whether initiation was vitiated due to non-specification of the exact charge, i.e., "concealment of income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars." The penalty notice was found to be omnibus, retaining both limbs without striking off the inapplicable one or otherwise indicating the precise ground, thereby denying clear notice of the allegation. Relying on binding precedent that such ambiguity invalidates penalty initiation, the tribunal's deletion of penalty was upheld, and the revenue's appeal was dismissed for absence of any substantial question of law. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.