https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756632 The ITAT Jaipur quashed penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for trading addition estimation. The tribunal held that the AO failed to record specific satisfaction regarding penalty grounds and must communicate this to the assessee through section 274 notice. The court ruled that for a single income item, both concealment and inaccurate particulars cannot be simultaneously charged. Following precedent, generic printed forms listing all section 271 grounds are legally insufficient. The assessee must know the specific ground to defend against, otherwise natural justice principles are violated. The penalty notices were declared invalid and quashed in favor of the assessee. en-us Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Aug 2024 06:43:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756632 The ITAT Jaipur quashed penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for trading addition estimation. The tribunal held that the AO failed to record specific satisfaction regarding penalty grounds and must communicate this to the assessee through section 274 notice. The court ruled that for a single income item, both concealment and inaccurate particulars cannot be simultaneously charged. Following precedent, generic printed forms listing all section 271 grounds are legally insufficient. The assessee must know the specific ground to defend against, otherwise natural justice principles are violated. The penalty notices were declared invalid and quashed in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756632