BAL BHARTI NURSERY SCHOOL,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ALLAHABAD

ITA 62/ALLD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad06 October 2023AY 2008-097 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty notices were invalid as they failed to clearly specify the charge against the assessee, jumbling both 'concealed particulars' and 'furnished inaccurate particulars' without proper conjunctions or striking out inapplicable portions. Consequently, the penalty levied was vitiated.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The primary contention was that the penalty notices issued by the Assessing Officer were vague and did not specify the exact charge (concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars) against the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty notice under Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to clearly specify the charge against the assessee, and if such vagueness vitiates the penalty levied.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 274,Section 253

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ALLAHABAD “SMC”

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Bansal
Hearing: 12/09/2023Pronounced: 06/10/2023

Heard together (3 matters)

I.T.A. No.62/Alld/2023
I.T.A. No.63/Alld/2023
I.T.A. No.64/Alld/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 30.03.2023 for AY. 2008-09, AY. 2010-11 & AY. 2011-12 confirming the penalty levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”).

2.

Since both parties agree that the penalty levied by the AO/Ld. CIT(A

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →