https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757049 The ITAT Amritsar ruled in favor of the assessee regarding penalty under section 271(1)(c). The tribunal held that the penalty notice under section 274 was defective as it failed to specify whether the penalty was for concealing income particulars or furnishing inaccurate particulars. This defect was deemed incurable and went to the root of the matter, rendering the notice legally invalid. The decision was supported by SC precedent in CIT vs SSA Emerald Meadows and Karnataka HC ruling in CIT vs Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory. en-us Mon, 12 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Aug 2024 08:33:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757049 The ITAT Amritsar ruled in favor of the assessee regarding penalty under section 271(1)(c). The tribunal held that the penalty notice under section 274 was defective as it failed to specify whether the penalty was for concealing income particulars or furnishing inaccurate particulars. This defect was deemed incurable and went to the root of the matter, rendering the notice legally invalid. The decision was supported by SC precedent in CIT vs SSA Emerald Meadows and Karnataka HC ruling in CIT vs Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 12 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757049