Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 360 - ITAT DELHILevy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective notice - non specified the exact charge, viz., whether the charge is that the Assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or “concealed particulars of income” by striking out the irrelevant portion of printed show cause notice - HELD THAT:- The standard proforma of notice under section 274 without striking of the irrelevant clauses would lead to an inference of non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dilip N. Shroff vs. JCIT [2007 (5) TMI 198 - SUPREME COURT] has also noticed that where the Assessing Officer issues notice under section 274 in the standard proforma and the inappropriate words are not deleted, the same would postulate that the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Thus levy of penalty suffers from non-application of mind. Thus the manner in which the AO has issued notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 19.03.2013 without striking off the irrelevant words, the penalty proceedings show anon-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and is, thus, unsustainable. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|