https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352608 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, canceling the penalty of Rs. 70,69,920 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found the notice issued by the Assessing Officer defective for not specifying the charge against the assessee, following the precedent set by the Karnataka High Court in SSA's Emerald Meadows. Emphasizing the principle of favoring the assessee in cases of ambiguity, the Tribunal ruled that a defective notice cannot sustain a penalty, leading to the cancellation of the penalty originally confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). en-us Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 11:35:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352608 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, canceling the penalty of Rs. 70,69,920 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found the notice issued by the Assessing Officer defective for not specifying the charge against the assessee, following the precedent set by the Karnataka High Court in SSA's Emerald Meadows. Emphasizing the principle of favoring the assessee in cases of ambiguity, the Tribunal ruled that a defective notice cannot sustain a penalty, leading to the cancellation of the penalty originally confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352608