Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 1059 - AT - Income TaxLevying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition made of unexplained investment under section 69 - defective notice - Held that:- The perusal of the notice reveals that the AO has not strike out the irrelevant portion of the notice. Further, we have also perused the Assessment Order passed under section 153A rws 143(3) dated 08.06.2012. The perusal of Assessment Order reveals that the AO has not specified under which limb of section 271(1)(c), the penalty is initiated. The AO simply noted “therefor penalty proceeding under section 271(1)(c) is hereby initiated.” Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Manu Engineering (1978 (9) TMI 18 - GUJARAT High Court) and Delhi High Court in CIT Vs Virgo Marketing (2008 (1) TMI 885 - DELHI HIGH COURT) held that where from a reading of assessment order, it was not clear as to why Assessing Officer chose to initiate penalty proceedings against assessee and under which part of section 271(1)(c), penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) is liable to be set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|