Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 1101 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 271(1)(c) - validity of notice - without specifying the specific charge under which the penalty is proposed - Held that:- It is mandatory on the part of the AO to point out the specific charge and strike off one of the two charges contained in the notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 falling which the proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and consequent order were to be quashed. CIT V/s Manjunath Cotton and Ginning Factory reported in [2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] held that the AO has to mention specific charge in the notice whether the penalty is for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and has to strike off the charge not applicable. Thus we are of the considered view that the proceedings initiated by the AO without specifying the specific charge under which the penalty is proposed to be initiated is bad in law and so is the consequent order.- Decided in favour of assessee.
|