Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 982 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - non specification of charge - whether the penalty is on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or for concealment of income? - HELD THAT:- Assessment order dated 24/12/2011 clearly shows that the AO recorded satisfaction that the assessee was guilty of concealment of income/filing inaccurate particulars of income and therefore proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act were to be initiated separately. A copy of notice dated 23/12/2011 is produced before us and it shows that the penalty was proposed for the assessee having concealed the particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income. Neither the assessment order, nor the notice issued under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Act specify the ground on which the penalty was proposed. It simply states that either for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars, such proceedings are initiated. It is therefore, clear that neither the assessment order nor the notice issued under section 274 of the Act give any reasonable grounds for the assessee to defend themselves. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory [2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and SSA’s Emerald Meadows [2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SC ORDER] wherein it was held that the notice issued by the learned Assessing Officer would be bad in law if it did not specify which limb of section 271(1)( c ) of the Act the penalty proceedings had been initiated under i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|