The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of penalty u/s ...

Penalty issue: AO didn't specify charges or record proper satisfaction. Vague notice invalidates penalty. Assessee wins!

June 25, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

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 assessing officer had recorded proper satisfaction. The assessee offered additional income during a search related to inflated marketing expenses. The Tribunal found that the assessing officer did not specify the charge in the penalty proceedings notice, rendering the initiation of penalty proceedings invalid. The vague notice issued was deemed void, leading to the penalty order being quashed in favor of the assessee.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The Appellate Tribunal considered the issue of penalty u/s ...

Penalty issue: AO didn't specify charges or record proper satisfaction. Vague notice invalidates penalty. Assessee wins!

June 25, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The assessment u/s 153C mandates the recording of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer (AO) upon discovery of material likely to "have a bearing on the determination of...

Penalty imposed u/s 270A(9) for underreporting and misreporting of income was challenged due to non-specification of clear charge. The Tribunal held that underreporting...

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...

The Assessing Officer (AO) consciously deleted irrelevant portions from the show cause notice, mentioning only the charge of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income....

HC ruled penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E require explicit satisfaction to be recorded by Assessing Officer during reassessment. Mere recording of...

Penalty u/s 271D - violation of provisions u/s 269SS - cash receipt claimed as advance against sales - recording of the satisfaction by the AO is sine qua non for...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non recording of satisfaction - When satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of IT Act is recorded by the AO in...

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...

The ITAT held that for penalty u/s 271D for contravention of section 269SS, recording satisfaction by AO is mandatory. Citing Jaya Laxmi Rice Mills case, it emphasized...

Validity of Assessment u/s 153C - Notice issued by any officer other than jurisdictional AO - the entire conspectus of the case, it appears that the AO had recorded the...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that every non-compliance with a notice u/s 142(1) gives a separate cause of action for levying penalty u/s 271(1)(b)....

Proceedings u/s. 153C r.w.s. 153A - Recording of satisfaction - CIT (Appeals) not given finding that what basis he came to such conclusion that there was a recording of...

Penalty u/s. 271B - failure to get accounts audited - When a particular authority has been designated to record his satisfaction on any particular issue, then it is...

Notice u/s 148 - AO has not recorded any reasons for re-assessment proceedings and merely acted on the borrowed satisfaction recorded by another AO without jurisdiction...

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...

Quick Updates: