<?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 (10) TMI 534 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779738</link>
    <description>ITAT CHENNAI - AT held that penalty notices under s.274 read with s.271(1)(c) were defective and invalid because they failed to specify the precise charge (whether concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars). Accordingly, the show-cause notices were held bad in law and the penalties set aside. The bench relied on precedent from HC decisions, noting related SLP dismissal by SC, and decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2025 09:01:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=857732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 534 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779738</link>
      <description>ITAT CHENNAI - AT held that penalty notices under s.274 read with s.271(1)(c) were defective and invalid because they failed to specify the precise charge (whether concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars). Accordingly, the show-cause notices were held bad in law and the penalties set aside. The bench relied on precedent from HC decisions, noting related SLP dismissal by SC, and decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779738</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>