https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390879 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found the assessing officer lacked clarity in specifying the charge for penalty proceedings, leading to confusion and errors in the penalty notice. Due to this ambiguity and failure to strike off inapplicable limbs, the penalty order was deemed invalid. Following the precedent set by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, overturning the decisions of the tax authorities and relieving the assessee from the penalty. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jan 2020 08:33:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390879 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found the assessing officer lacked clarity in specifying the charge for penalty proceedings, leading to confusion and errors in the penalty notice. Due to this ambiguity and failure to strike off inapplicable limbs, the penalty order was deemed invalid. Following the precedent set by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, overturning the decisions of the tax authorities and relieving the assessee from the penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390879