Allowing the appeal, the notice under section 271(1)(c) of the Act did not specify the contravention for which it was issued by striking out the inapplicable potion to show whether it was issued for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. As a result, the notice was defective and penalty imposed thereby was not sustainable. (AY.2012-13)
Texmaco Rail and Engineering Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (2021) 85 ITR 267 (Kol.) (Trib.)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice not specifying contravention for which issued-Notice defective-Penalty not sustainable.