https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410180 The case involved an appeal by the assessee against a penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The key contention was the defective penalty notice that did not specify the charge for which the penalty was proposed to be levied. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court ruled that penalty proceedings should be based on the grounds specified in the notice. As the penalty notice lacked specificity, the penalty was deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal, considering the quantum appeal outcome and defects in the notice, directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty, ultimately allowing the assessee's appeal. en-us Fri, 23 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jul 2021 08:55:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410180 The case involved an appeal by the assessee against a penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The key contention was the defective penalty notice that did not specify the charge for which the penalty was proposed to be levied. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court ruled that penalty proceedings should be based on the grounds specified in the notice. As the penalty notice lacked specificity, the penalty was deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal, considering the quantum appeal outcome and defects in the notice, directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty, ultimately allowing the assessee's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410180