<?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 (11) TMI 2061 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471526</link>
    <description>Penalty proceedings cannot rest on a cyclostyled show cause notice that leaves irrelevant particulars unstruck and fails to specify the applicable charge. Such vagueness prevents an effective response and makes the notice incapable of forming a valid foundation for penalty. Applying the Full Bench ruling relied on by the Tribunal, the penalty was treated as invalid because the notice did not clearly communicate the charge to be answered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2026 19:20:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=921296" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 2061 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471526</link>
      <description>Penalty proceedings cannot rest on a cyclostyled show cause notice that leaves irrelevant particulars unstruck and fails to specify the applicable charge. Such vagueness prevents an effective response and makes the notice incapable of forming a valid foundation for penalty. Applying the Full Bench ruling relied on by the Tribunal, the penalty was treated as invalid because the notice did not clearly communicate the charge to be answered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471526</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>