https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762122 The Delhi HC upheld ITAT's decision to delete penalty u/s 271(1)(c) due to defective notice u/s 274. The AO failed to specify which limb of penalty - concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars - was being invoked against the assessee who claimed inaccurate expenses. The court held that these are distinct charges requiring clear specification in penalty proceedings, as they are penal in nature with penalties ranging 100-300% of tax. Following precedent from Karnataka HC in Manjunath Cotton case, the court ruled the penalty levy invalid due to ambiguous charges, deciding in favor of the assessee. en-us Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Jul 2025 17:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762122 The Delhi HC upheld ITAT's decision to delete penalty u/s 271(1)(c) due to defective notice u/s 274. The AO failed to specify which limb of penalty - concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars - was being invoked against the assessee who claimed inaccurate expenses. The court held that these are distinct charges requiring clear specification in penalty proceedings, as they are penal in nature with penalties ranging 100-300% of tax. Following precedent from Karnataka HC in Manjunath Cotton case, the court ruled the penalty levy invalid due to ambiguous charges, deciding in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762122