https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389472 The appeals challenged the penalty under section 271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer for ambiguous grounds. The CIT(A) upheld the penalty, citing both inaccurate particulars and concealment of income. However, following a High Court decision, the penalty was deleted due to the lack of clarity in specifying the charge. Consistency led to deleting penalties in subsequent years. Ultimately, all appeals were allowed, emphasizing the need for clear grounds in penalty notices under the Income-tax Act, resulting in penalty deletion across multiple assessment years. en-us Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Dec 2019 12:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389472 The appeals challenged the penalty under section 271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer for ambiguous grounds. The CIT(A) upheld the penalty, citing both inaccurate particulars and concealment of income. However, following a High Court decision, the penalty was deleted due to the lack of clarity in specifying the charge. Consistency led to deleting penalties in subsequent years. Ultimately, all appeals were allowed, emphasizing the need for clear grounds in penalty notices under the Income-tax Act, resulting in penalty deletion across multiple assessment years. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389472