https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91895 ITAT upheld that the assessee failed to comply with successive notices issued under s.142(1) and offered no reasonable explanation; non-compliance persisted during penalty proceedings and before the Ld. CIT(A). However, ITAT found the AO erred in levying a composite penalty of Rs.20,000 under s.271(1)(b), observing that under s.271(1)(b) each distinct failure attracts a separate penalty and separate notice is requisite for multiple failures. Consequentially, ITAT reduced the penalty to Rs.10,000 and partly allowed the appeal, leaving the factual finding of non-compliance intact but modifying the quantum of penalty on procedural grounds. en-us Mon, 25 Aug 2025 09:43:15 +0530 Mon, 25 Aug 2025 09:43:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91895 ITAT upheld that the assessee failed to comply with successive notices issued under s.142(1) and offered no reasonable explanation; non-compliance persisted during penalty proceedings and before the Ld. CIT(A). However, ITAT found the AO erred in levying a composite penalty of Rs.20,000 under s.271(1)(b), observing that under s.271(1)(b) each distinct failure attracts a separate penalty and separate notice is requisite for multiple failures. Consequentially, ITAT reduced the penalty to Rs.10,000 and partly allowed the appeal, leaving the factual finding of non-compliance intact but modifying the quantum of penalty on procedural grounds. Highlights Income Tax Mon, 25 Aug 2025 09:43:15 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91895