https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775683 Penalty proceedings under section 271AAB(1A) were quashed due to the Assessing Officer's failure to specify the relevant clause for levy of penalty, rendering the notice defective. Consistent with precedent, the Tribunal held that omission to pinpoint the specific limb vitiates the entire penalty process. Additionally, as penalty was not levied for the preceding year on identical facts, the AO could not adopt a contrary stance for the subsequent year. The GST paid on undisclosed sales was allowed as a deduction from gross profit, resulting in no undisclosed income for penalty levy. The CIT(A) erred in granting only partial relief; the entire penalty was set aside, dismissing Revenue's appeal and allowing the assessee's grounds. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Jul 2025 08:30:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775683 Penalty proceedings under section 271AAB(1A) were quashed due to the Assessing Officer's failure to specify the relevant clause for levy of penalty, rendering the notice defective. Consistent with precedent, the Tribunal held that omission to pinpoint the specific limb vitiates the entire penalty process. Additionally, as penalty was not levied for the preceding year on identical facts, the AO could not adopt a contrary stance for the subsequent year. The GST paid on undisclosed sales was allowed as a deduction from gross profit, resulting in no undisclosed income for penalty levy. The CIT(A) erred in granting only partial relief; the entire penalty was set aside, dismissing Revenue's appeal and allowing the assessee's grounds. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775683