TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R OF INCOME TAX -VS- MANJUNATHA COTTON AND GINNING FACTORY (2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT). Disallowance of depreciation on the ground that the assessee claimed the eligible deduction u/s 24 and also the depreciation in respect of the very same property. However, the order dated 09.11.2015 passed u/s 154/143(3) of the Act passed by the AO in this matter clearly shows that the AO had considered different properties as such the disallowance was deleted to an extent of ₹ 8,13,742/-. It shows that there was mistaken identity of the property at the time of the assessment proceedings. Further, mere disallowance of depreciation in this peculiar set of facts and circumstances does not invite the proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- and added back to the income of the assessee. Simultaneously, AO initiated proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and concluded them by order dated 21.08.2014 with the levy of penalty of ₹ 5,55,000/-. Appeal preferred by the assessee was dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, the assessee filed this appeal challenging the levy of penalty as confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A), both on the questions of law and facts. 3. At the outset, it is the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act does not speak of any specific limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act i.e. whether it is a concealment of income or furnish inaccurate particulars thereof. Reliance is placed on CIT vs SSA s Emerald Meadows 73 ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon ble Apex Court in CIT vs SSA s Emerald Meadows [2016] 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC). These decisions are followed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in a number of cases. 6. Now, coming to the facts of this case, vide page No.1 of the Paper Book, the assessee produced the copy of notice u/s 274 of the Act wherein both the limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act namely concealment of particulars of the income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof, are mentioned and this note does not specify under which limb, the assessee is charged, defend themselves. The decisions relied upon by the assessee, therefore, are applicable to the facts of the case and the proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, are bad for want of valid notice. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
