https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348344 The ITAT partially allowed the assessee's appeal, quashing the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT held that the penalty proceedings were legally flawed as the AO failed to specify the charge clearly in the notices, citing relevant case laws. Emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance, the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the necessity of clearly specifying charges in penalty assessments. en-us Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Sep 2017 07:39:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348344 The ITAT partially allowed the assessee's appeal, quashing the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT held that the penalty proceedings were legally flawed as the AO failed to specify the charge clearly in the notices, citing relevant case laws. Emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance, the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the necessity of clearly specifying charges in penalty assessments. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348344