https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459200 ITAT Delhi held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was unsustainable due to defective notice under Section 274. The AO failed to strike out one of the twin charges (concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars), creating ambiguity about the specific charge. The CIT(A) was also unclear whether penalty was correctly levied. Additionally, while the AO recorded satisfaction for concealment of income in the assessment order, the penalty was actually levied for furnishing inaccurate particulars. Following precedents from Karnataka and Bombay HCs, the penalty was deleted and the assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Mon, 22 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Dec 2024 21:50:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459200 ITAT Delhi held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was unsustainable due to defective notice under Section 274. The AO failed to strike out one of the twin charges (concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars), creating ambiguity about the specific charge. The CIT(A) was also unclear whether penalty was correctly levied. Additionally, while the AO recorded satisfaction for concealment of income in the assessment order, the penalty was actually levied for furnishing inaccurate particulars. Following precedents from Karnataka and Bombay HCs, the penalty was deleted and the assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459200