Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - validity of notice u/s 274 - Quite ...

Invalid Notice u/s 274: Lack of Clarity on Penalty Type Renders Assessing Officer's Notice Invalid.

May 20, 2017

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - validity of notice u/s 274 - Quite clearly, non-striking-off of the irrelevant limb in the said notice does not convey to the assessee as to which of the two charges it has to respond. The aforesaid infirmity in the notice has been sought to be demonstrated as a reflection of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - validity of notice u/s 274 - Quite ...

Invalid Notice u/s 274: Lack of Clarity on Penalty Type Renders Assessing Officer's Notice Invalid.

May 20, 2017

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The assessee challenged the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) for short credit of sale consideration received from the sale of copyrights and cable rights. The issue...

Notices issued u/s 148 by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) were held invalid due to lack of jurisdiction, as per Section 151A...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It was questioned whether a precise charge was brought against the assessee and if the...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied by the Assessing Officer solely based on the order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission withdrawing immunity from penalty and...

Faceless assessment notices issued by Joint Assessing Officer instead of Facessing Assessing Officer held invalid as lacking jurisdiction u/s 151A read with Central...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - The notice u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(l)(c) of the Act were issued without striking off the irrelevant portion of the limb...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Mandation of specification of charge - It is clear that for the AO to assume jurisdiction u/s 271(1)(c), proper notice is necessary and the...

Notice u/s 143(2) issued by a non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer/Deputy Commissioner is invalid and cannot be cured. The assessment order framed u/s 143(3) based on...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective notice u/s 274 - non specification of clear charge - the Tribunal held that that the penalty imposed by the A.O is not valid due to the...

Penalty u/s 271AAB - Defects in the notice issued u/s 274 - CIT(A) reduced the penalty to 10% applying provisions of Section 271AAB(a) of the Act as against penalty...

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - Emphasizing the principles outlined by the Karnataka High Court, the Tribunal reaffirmed the importance of...

ITAT held that no specific charge was framed against the assessee in the show-cause notice issued u/s 274 read with Section 270A for misreporting of income. While the...

The assessee had conceded the compensation income to be included as income from other sources. However, upon judicial examination, the compensation was found to be...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of a penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) and u/s 274 regarding unexplained differences in trading sales and purchase costs. The...

Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to notice u/s 148 issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), violating...

Quick Updates: