Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1625 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - non specify the limb of section 271(1)(c) for which the penalty was initiated - non-application of mind rendering the penalty illegal and invalid - defective notice - HELD THAT:- When penalty proceedings are sought to be initiated by the revenue under Section 271(1)(c) the specific ground which forms the foundation therefor has to be spelt out in clear terms. Otherwise, an assessee would not have proper opportunity to put forth his defence. When the proceedings are penal in nature, resulting in imposition of penalty ranging from 100% to 300% of the tax liability, the charge must be unequivocal and unambiguous. When the charge is either concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof, the revenue must specify as to which one of the two is sought to be pressed into service and cannot be permitted to club both by interjecting an ‘or’ between the two, as in the present case. This ambiguity in the show-cause notice is further compounded presently by the confused finding of the Assessing Officer that he was satisfied that the assessee was guilty of both. See THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, VISAKHAPATNAM VERSUS SMT. BAISETTY REVATHI [2017 (7) TMI 776 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] The penalty proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer are bad in law and liable to be quashed. Hence we quash the penalty proceedings/order and delete the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee
|