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
2019 (6) TMI 1182 - HC - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defective show cause notice - notice issued in printed form without specifically mentioning whether the ground is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars - impugned SCN is in a template and therefore it is not clear as to whether the impugned SCN has been issued on the basis that the writ petitioner has concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income - HELD THAT - Whether the impugned SCN is predicated on concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars and then proceed it was submitted that the Revenue cannot be now permitted to rectify the error. In this regard Section 292B of IT Act which has been adverted to and which has been relied on by the Revenue counsel comes to the aid of the Revenue . There is no dispute that the impugned SCN qualifies as a notice within the meaning of Section 292B. If that be so it cannot be held to be invalid merely by reason of mistake or defect i.e. mistake or defect of issuing it in a template and not scoring of the relevant ground and leaving out the applicable ground. If it is not a defect of scoring of the inapplicable ground it is a case of using the conjunction and by scoring of or if it is predicated on both grounds. If aforesaid position is clarified and thereafter the impugned SCN is carried to its logical end it will satisfy all parameters and ingredients of NJP. This Court is reminded of the observation in Mumbai International Airport Private Limited Vs. Golden Chariot Airport and another 2010 (9) TMI 1153 - SUPREME COURT where Hon ble Supreme Court held that action of law is not a game of chess . Merely because the Revenue has made a move and there is an error in the move there is nothing to show that no opportunity should be given to the Revenue to correct the error by issuing a corrigendum or addendum and then proceeding with the matter. After all it is not an irreversible move in a game of chess. This Court passes the following order a) the impugned SCN being SCN dated 23.12.2016 bearing reference No.PAN AAFCA0638J shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. b) within the aforesaid three weeks second respondent shall issue a corrigendum/addendum/errata to the impugned SCN clearly setting out the ground/s on which impugned SCN w as issued i.e. as to whether it has been issued on the ground that particulars have been concealed or on the ground that inaccurate particulars of income have been furnished or both. c) aforesaid addendum/corrigendum/errata to impugned SCN shall be duly served on the writ petitioner with due acknowledgement within the aforesaid three weeks period and from the date of service writ petitioner shall be given another three weeks time to respond to the impugned SCN read with addendum/corrigendum/errata. d) It is open to the writ petitioner to ask for the basis on which the impugned SCN is predicated and the basis on which the same has been issued and the same will be dealt with in a manner known to law. e) after receipt of response from the writ petitioner and in the event of writ petitioner choosing to opt for availing the opportunity of being heard in person i.e. personal hearing the same shall also be granted and the impugned SCN along with addendum/ corrigendum/ errata shall be carried to its logical end in accordance with law after adhering to all natural justice principles.
|