https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759925 The ITAT Jodhpur allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty under section 271(1)(c) relating to defective notice under section 274. The case involved differences between sale consideration stamp value under section 56(vii)(b) and unexplained cash credits. Following the Bombay HC full bench decision in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT, the tribunal held that joint satisfaction for both concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars was recorded in the assessment order, making the penalty proceedings defective. The penalty orders by the AO and CIT(A) were deemed erroneous and set aside. en-us Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Oct 2024 10:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759925 The ITAT Jodhpur allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty under section 271(1)(c) relating to defective notice under section 274. The case involved differences between sale consideration stamp value under section 56(vii)(b) and unexplained cash credits. Following the Bombay HC full bench decision in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT, the tribunal held that joint satisfaction for both concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars was recorded in the assessment order, making the penalty proceedings defective. The penalty orders by the AO and CIT(A) were deemed erroneous and set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759925