https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=10031 The Tribunal should assess whether a notice under section 271 read with section 271.1.c was defective or omnibus because the relevant charge was not indicated; as final fact-finder it may entertain a challenge to notice specificity raised for the first time before it. Denying such pleas by reference to higher court decisions decided on different factual and procedural histories neglects the Tribunal's duty to determine the factual foundation for initiation of penalty proceedings and to apply precedents protecting notice specificity where appropriate. en-us Sat, 02 Oct 2021 09:46:49 +0530 Mon, 04 Oct 2021 11:45:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=10031 The Tribunal should assess whether a notice under section 271 read with section 271.1.c was defective or omnibus because the relevant charge was not indicated; as final fact-finder it may entertain a challenge to notice specificity raised for the first time before it. Denying such pleas by reference to higher court decisions decided on different factual and procedural histories neglects the Tribunal's duty to determine the factual foundation for initiation of penalty proceedings and to apply precedents protecting notice specificity where appropriate. Articles Other Topics Sat, 02 Oct 2021 09:46:49 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=10031