<?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 (6) TMI 216 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772103</link>
    <description>The SC/ITAT analyzed the validity of a penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for noncompliance with Section 142(1) notices. The Tribunal found the penalty unsustainable due to improper notice service and the assessee&#039;s foreign residency. The case was remanded for fresh adjudication, emphasizing that penalty cannot be imposed without willful default and proper notice, particularly when the assessee was absent from India during the proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 08:40:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=826560" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 216 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772103</link>
      <description>The SC/ITAT analyzed the validity of a penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for noncompliance with Section 142(1) notices. The Tribunal found the penalty unsustainable due to improper notice service and the assessee&#039;s foreign residency. The case was remanded for fresh adjudication, emphasizing that penalty cannot be imposed without willful default and proper notice, particularly when the assessee was absent from India during the proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772103</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>