https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767773 ITAT Delhi ruled that penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to defective notice. The penalty notice failed to specify which limb of section 271(1)(c) was being invoked - whether for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Following the precedent in Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory case, ITAT held that when the assessee is not specifically made aware of the exact charges, the penalty cannot be sustained. The matter was decided in favor of the assessee. en-us Fri, 21 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Mar 2025 08:48:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767773 ITAT Delhi ruled that penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to defective notice. The penalty notice failed to specify which limb of section 271(1)(c) was being invoked - whether for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Following the precedent in Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory case, ITAT held that when the assessee is not specifically made aware of the exact charges, the penalty cannot be sustained. The matter was decided in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 21 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767773