https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190865 ITAT (Kolkata) held penalty under section 271(1)(c) invalid and deleted it where the AO failed to specify whether the assessee concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars, and did not record requisite satisfaction for either charge. Relying on the principle from higher court authority that satisfaction of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is essential before levying penalty, the tribunal found the penalty order defective and decided in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 21 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Sep 2025 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190865 ITAT (Kolkata) held penalty under section 271(1)(c) invalid and deleted it where the AO failed to specify whether the assessee concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars, and did not record requisite satisfaction for either charge. Relying on the principle from higher court authority that satisfaction of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is essential before levying penalty, the tribunal found the penalty order defective and decided in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190865