https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244481 The dominant issue was whether a penalty order under s. 271B could stand without recording prior approval of the competent authority as mandated by the Act. The HC held that it is incumbent on the ITO to disclose in the penalty order that prior approval of the JCIT was obtained; absence of such recital warrants an inference that approval was not taken, rendering the order incompetent and a nullity that can be challenged at any stage. Consequently, the penalty order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the AO to pass a fresh order under s. 271B after obtaining necessary approval, resulting in relief to the assessee. en-us Mon, 17 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 11:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244481 The dominant issue was whether a penalty order under s. 271B could stand without recording prior approval of the competent authority as mandated by the Act. The HC held that it is incumbent on the ITO to disclose in the penalty order that prior approval of the JCIT was obtained; absence of such recital warrants an inference that approval was not taken, rendering the order incompetent and a nullity that can be challenged at any stage. Consequently, the penalty order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the AO to pass a fresh order under s. 271B after obtaining necessary approval, resulting in relief to the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 17 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244481