https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423994 The appeal challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for excess stock of silver. Despite the penalty notice retaining both limbs of the penalty provision, the penalty was imposed based only on one limb. Relying on Bombay High Court judgments, the Appellate Tribunal held that such a notice with both limbs intact renders the penalty invalid. Consequently, the penalty was overturned, and the direction was given to delete the penalty. The appeal was allowed, and the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was set aside on 9th June 2022. en-us Thu, 09 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jun 2022 08:39:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423994 The appeal challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for excess stock of silver. Despite the penalty notice retaining both limbs of the penalty provision, the penalty was imposed based only on one limb. Relying on Bombay High Court judgments, the Appellate Tribunal held that such a notice with both limbs intact renders the penalty invalid. Consequently, the penalty was overturned, and the direction was given to delete the penalty. The appeal was allowed, and the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was set aside on 9th June 2022. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423994