Allowing the appeal the Court held that the notice did not specifically mention as to whether the assessee had concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars or both hence levy of penalty is held to be not valid. Followed CIT v. S. I. Paripushpam (2001) 249 ITR 550 (Mad.)(HC). (AY. 2013-14)
Babuji Jacob v. ITO (2021) 430 ITR 259 / 277 Taxman 502(Mad.)(HC)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice must specify whether there has been concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 274]