PCIT v. Shyam Sunder Jindal (2025) 481 ITR 568/ 304 Taxman 1 (SC) Editorial : PCIT v. Shyam Sunder Jindal(2023) 296 Taxman 115 / (2024) 462 ITR 501 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the charge in the notice-None of relevant columns had been indicated nor had irrelevant columns been struck off-Penalty notice was invalid in law-SLP dismissed. [S. 274, Art. 136]

 

 High Court held that where penalty notice issued against assessee was not adverted to specific limb of section 271(1)(c), thus, Assessing Officer was not clear whether he intended to levy a penalty upon assessee for concealment of particulars of his income or furnishing inaccurate particulars, Tribunal was justified in quashing penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) initiated against assessee.  SLP of revenue dimisseed. (AY. 2008-09 to 2011-12)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*