https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378331 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 67,025 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The penalty was canceled due to the lack of specificity in the penalty notice issued by the Assessing Officer, failing to clearly indicate whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing a clear opportunity for the assessee to respond to allegations in penalty proceedings, citing legal precedents and highlighting the necessity for precise penalty notices to ensure fair proceedings. en-us Wed, 10 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Apr 2019 05:57:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378331 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 67,025 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The penalty was canceled due to the lack of specificity in the penalty notice issued by the Assessing Officer, failing to clearly indicate whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing a clear opportunity for the assessee to respond to allegations in penalty proceedings, citing legal precedents and highlighting the necessity for precise penalty notices to ensure fair proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378331