https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350839 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee on jurisdictional grounds, deleting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer's lack of clarity in specifying the charge for which the penalty was initiated vitiated the penalty order. Emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, the Tribunal followed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in a similar case. The penalty was deleted based on the jurisdictional issue, without delving into the merits further. en-us Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Nov 2017 04:40:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350839 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee on jurisdictional grounds, deleting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer's lack of clarity in specifying the charge for which the penalty was initiated vitiated the penalty order. Emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, the Tribunal followed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in a similar case. The penalty was deleted based on the jurisdictional issue, without delving into the merits further. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350839