<?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 1206 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773093</link>
    <description>The SC examined the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for non-compliance with assessment notices. The court found that mere dispatch of notices to the last known address does not constitute proper service if the assessee did not actually receive them. The court set aside the Rs. 30,000 penalty, holding that the assessee demonstrated sufficient cause for non-compliance and was not given adequate opportunity to respond to the notices.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=829802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1206 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773093</link>
      <description>The SC examined the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for non-compliance with assessment notices. The court found that mere dispatch of notices to the last known address does not constitute proper service if the assessee did not actually receive them. The court set aside the Rs. 30,000 penalty, holding that the assessee demonstrated sufficient cause for non-compliance and was not given adequate opportunity to respond to the notices.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773093</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>