<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (4) TMI 604 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768690</link>
    <description>The SC/Tribunal determined that penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of Income-tax Act were invalid due to a defective notice. The notice failed to specify whether the penalty was for income concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal concluded the vague notice violated statutory requirements, thereby quashing the penalty order in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2026 17:22:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=813486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 604 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768690</link>
      <description>The SC/Tribunal determined that penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of Income-tax Act were invalid due to a defective notice. The notice failed to specify whether the penalty was for income concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal concluded the vague notice violated statutory requirements, thereby quashing the penalty order in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768690</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>