https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781424 ITAT MUMBAI - AT held that penalty under s.271(1)(c) is void where notices failed to specify whether proceedings were for "concealment of income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars," treating omnibus language as non-application of mind violating natural justice. Although additions under s.68 (share capital/premium) were sustained, confirmation of quantum did not validate penalty absent compliant notice. Following relevant HC and SC precedents, the Tribunal set aside the penalty order, allowed the appeal, and directed the AO to delete the penalty. en-us Wed, 17 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Nov 2025 07:56:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781424 ITAT MUMBAI - AT held that penalty under s.271(1)(c) is void where notices failed to specify whether proceedings were for "concealment of income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars," treating omnibus language as non-application of mind violating natural justice. Although additions under s.68 (share capital/premium) were sustained, confirmation of quantum did not validate penalty absent compliant notice. Following relevant HC and SC precedents, the Tribunal set aside the penalty order, allowed the appeal, and directed the AO to delete the penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 17 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781424