Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Aircel Limited Vs DCIT (Madras High Court)
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Aircel Limited Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) Conclusion: Income tax penalty proceedings initiated against the company under Section271(1)(c) was quashed as no sufficient time was given for reply and a personal hearing rendered the proceedings procedurally unfair and legally unsustainable. Held: In the instant case, show cause notice dated 27.03.2024 (for FY 2016–17) was uploaded on GST portal at 08:29 p.m., requiring reply with supporting documents by 06:09 p.m. next day (28.03.2024). Assessee contended that hardly 24 hours for reply; no opportunity of personal hearing was given  before passi...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930