https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80423 The Appellate Tribunal held that the penalty imposed u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with notices u/s 142(1) was not legally valid. The Assessing Officer failed to prove actual service of notices u/s 142(1), and willful default by the assessee could not be established. The Tribunal observed that separate penalty proceedings should have been initiated for each failure, instead of a consolidated penalty order. In the absence of proof of service, the penalty was deleted, and the assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 14 Aug 2024 08:33:26 +0530 Wed, 14 Aug 2024 08:33:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80423 The Appellate Tribunal held that the penalty imposed u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with notices u/s 142(1) was not legally valid. The Assessing Officer failed to prove actual service of notices u/s 142(1), and willful default by the assessee could not be established. The Tribunal observed that separate penalty proceedings should have been initiated for each failure, instead of a consolidated penalty order. In the absence of proof of service, the penalty was deleted, and the assessee's appeal was allowed. Highlights Income Tax Wed, 14 Aug 2024 08:33:26 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80423