https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346879 The Bombay HC upheld a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee challenged the penalty on grounds of insufficient notice and lack of reasonable opportunity to be heard. The court held that Section 274's requirement for reasonable opportunity of being heard does not extend to framing specific charges or seeking explanations regarding the quantum of penalty proposed. The court found that adequate opportunity was provided, the assessee's explanation was considered, mandatory approvals were obtained, and the penalty was subsequently reduced by the Appellate Authority. The court concluded there was no arbitrary exercise of discretion, proper reasons were recorded, and the jurisdiction regarding penalty quantum was exercised justly and within limits. The decision went against the assessee. en-us Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jul 2025 12:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346879 The Bombay HC upheld a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee challenged the penalty on grounds of insufficient notice and lack of reasonable opportunity to be heard. The court held that Section 274's requirement for reasonable opportunity of being heard does not extend to framing specific charges or seeking explanations regarding the quantum of penalty proposed. The court found that adequate opportunity was provided, the assessee's explanation was considered, mandatory approvals were obtained, and the penalty was subsequently reduced by the Appellate Authority. The court concluded there was no arbitrary exercise of discretion, proper reasons were recorded, and the jurisdiction regarding penalty quantum was exercised justly and within limits. The decision went against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346879