Allowing the appeal the Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had failed to specify in the show-cause notice issued under section 271(1)(c) if the assessee had filed inaccurate particulars of income or had concealed the particulars of income. The Assessing Officer himself was not aware as to whether he was issuing notice to initiate the penalty proceedings either for “concealment of particulars of income” or “furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income”. The notice incorporated both the limbs of section 271(1)(c) and was vague and ambiguous. When the charge was to be framed against any person so as to move penal provisions against an assessee, the assessee was required to be specifically made aware of the charges to be levelled against him. When the notice did not specify the limb of section 271(1)(c) under which it was issued, penalty proceedings initiated under section 271(1)(c) were not sustainable. Tribunal also held that bonfide mistake in calculation levy of penalty is held to be not valid. (AY. 2008-09)