https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263877 Penalty under section 272A(2)(c) was held unsustainable because proper service of the notices relied on was not clearly established and the requisition was general in nature. The record also showed that the alleged single default had been treated as attracting multiple penalties on different codes, despite initiation through a common notice. The assessee demonstrated reasonable cause under section 273B, including the need to obtain head-office approvals and compliance delays caused by operational difficulties, year-end workload, and staff constraints. In these circumstances, the levy of penalty was not warranted and the penalties were cancelled. en-us Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Sep 2015 07:42:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263877 Penalty under section 272A(2)(c) was held unsustainable because proper service of the notices relied on was not clearly established and the requisition was general in nature. The record also showed that the alleged single default had been treated as attracting multiple penalties on different codes, despite initiation through a common notice. The assessee demonstrated reasonable cause under section 273B, including the need to obtain head-office approvals and compliance delays caused by operational difficulties, year-end workload, and staff constraints. In these circumstances, the levy of penalty was not warranted and the penalties were cancelled. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263877