https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420497 The ITAT affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act to one default of non-compliance, reducing the penalty amount to Rs. 10,000 from the initial Rs. 40,000 imposed by the AO. The ITAT emphasized that penalties should not be repeatedly imposed for the same non-compliance, supporting the CIT(A)'s rationale that penalties should be reasonable and based on the severity of non-compliance. Despite the assessee's arguments regarding lack of specific service dates in notices, the ITAT upheld the penalty, dismissing the appeal and maintaining the reduced penalty amount. en-us Wed, 30 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Apr 2022 09:14:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420497 The ITAT affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act to one default of non-compliance, reducing the penalty amount to Rs. 10,000 from the initial Rs. 40,000 imposed by the AO. The ITAT emphasized that penalties should not be repeatedly imposed for the same non-compliance, supporting the CIT(A)'s rationale that penalties should be reasonable and based on the severity of non-compliance. Despite the assessee's arguments regarding lack of specific service dates in notices, the ITAT upheld the penalty, dismissing the appeal and maintaining the reduced penalty amount. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420497