https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425296 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2008-09, quashing the penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) due to the lack of specificity in the penalty notice. The Tribunal held that the penalty proceedings were invalid as the notice failed to specify the exact limb of Section 271(1)(c), following legal precedents emphasizing the importance of clear and unambiguous communication in penalty notices to uphold principles of natural justice. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the judgments of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, emphasizing the necessity of informing the assessee of the grounds of penalty proceedings without ambiguity. en-us Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jul 2022 09:24:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425296 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2008-09, quashing the penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) due to the lack of specificity in the penalty notice. The Tribunal held that the penalty proceedings were invalid as the notice failed to specify the exact limb of Section 271(1)(c), following legal precedents emphasizing the importance of clear and unambiguous communication in penalty notices to uphold principles of natural justice. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the judgments of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, emphasizing the necessity of informing the assessee of the grounds of penalty proceedings without ambiguity. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425296