Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2017 (1) TMI 181 - AT - Income TaxLevy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) - Returns filed u/s.153A - as result of search and seizure operation some incriminating documents were found and seized relating to transaction of purchase and sale of plots shops etc. - on-money offered by the assessee - Held that - The satisfaction as recorded by AO which is evident from the assessment order itself does not establish the case of Revenue against the assessee that it is liable for levy of penalty for concealment under which limb i.e. for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The notice issued under section 274 by the Assessing Officer also does not show cause the assessee as to make him aware of exact charge levied against him. In the absence of same it causes prejudice to the right of reasonable opportunity to be allowed to the assessee before levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Consequently penalty notice issued in the present case suffers from infirmities i.e. lack of satisfaction and lack of notice being issued in making the assessee aware of exact charge against him hence the same is quashed. The penalty proceedings completed pursuant to such notice are vitiated and the same are held to be invalid. The assessee had offered additional income on account of on-money on sale of plots. The Assessing Officer had accepted the same and had initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings relating to section 271(1)(c) of the Act issued enhancement notice to the assessee. Thereafter he had gone through the seized documents and elaborately referred to them and even reproduced the scanned copies of such documents and comes to conclusion that loans were received from Ratanlal Bafna but still upholds the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Once the finding of CIT(A) is that these are loans received from Bafna and are not on-money received on sale of plots then in cases where penalty proceedings have been initiated on a different footing and the CIT(A) reverses the same and holds the same to be loans received by the assessee there is change in opinion and basis for levy of penalty for concealment varies. In such circumstances there is no merit in levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and there is no merit at all in levying the penalty @ 150%. Accordingly we allow the claim of assessee even on merits. Thus the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and additional ground of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed. - Decided in favour of assessee
|