<?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>2026 (5) TMI 1775 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792572</link>
    <description>A penalty notice under section 270A must specify the precise limb or sub-clause invoked so the assessee knows the exact charge. Where the notice is vague and does not identify the particular basis of penalty, it is treated as a foundational defect that cannot sustain the proceedings. Applying that principle, the Tribunal held the defective notice legally unsustainable and quashed both the initiation notice and the consequential penalty order as void ab initio in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 May 2026 08:29:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=904570" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 1775 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792572</link>
      <description>A penalty notice under section 270A must specify the precise limb or sub-clause invoked so the assessee knows the exact charge. Where the notice is vague and does not identify the particular basis of penalty, it is treated as a foundational defect that cannot sustain the proceedings. Applying that principle, the Tribunal held the defective notice legally unsustainable and quashed both the initiation notice and the consequential penalty order as void ab initio in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792572</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>