Tax Management India.Com

Home Page

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (2) TMI 740

Penalty u/s. 271 - defective notice - Held that:- AO has initiated the penalty for concealing the particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income as well as in the penalty order dated 29.6.2016 he held that the assessee had without reasonable cause concealed the particulars of his income, and / or furnished inaccurate particulars of income assessed. Therefore, in view of above, the penalty in dispute is not sustainable in the eyes of law and needs to be deleted. See CIT & Anr. Vs. M/s SSA’s Emerald Meadows [2015 (11) TMI 1620 – Karnataka High Court] wherein held that the notice issued by the Assessing Officer under section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) to be bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 5183/Del/2016 - Dated:- 7-2-2018 - Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member And Shri L. P. Sahu, Accountant Member Assessee by : Sh. R.S. Ahuja, CA Department by : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR ORDER Per H. S. Sidhu, JM This appeal by the Assessee is direct .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

e Assessee. We have perused the Notice dated 30.11.2010 issued by the AO for initiation of penalty and directing the assessee to appear before him. For the sake of convenience, some of the contents of the penalty Notice dated 30.11.2010 are reproduced as under:- …..it appears to me that you:- *have without reasonable cause failed to comply with a notice u/s.142(1)/143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961dated………………… * have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income in terms of explanation 1,2,3,4 and 5….. 6.1 After perusing the aforesaid contents of the Notice dated 30.11.2010, we are of the view that the AO has initiated the penalty for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, which is contrary to the provisions of law. We are of the view that notice issued by the AO u/s. 271(1)© read with Section 274 of the Act is bad in law as it does not specify which limb of section 271(1)© of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. There .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

y the AO to the assessee, we are of the view that the AO has initiated the penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income as well as in the penalty order dated 30.9.2013 AO has stated that he is satisfied that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income, which is contrary to law. In view of above, the penalty is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the following decisions:- i) CIT & Anr. Vs. M/s SSA s Emerald Meadows - 2015 (11) TMI 1620 - Karnataka High Court has held that Tribunal has correctly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee holding the notice issued by the Assessing Officer under section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) to be bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)© of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal, while allowing the appeal of the assessee, has relied on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (2013) (7) TMI 620- Karanataka .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:- 5.3.1 The above findings of the Ld. CIT(A) clearly establishes that the appellant has concealed the income of ₹ 26,50,500/- and did not declare in the return of income inspite of admitting a disclosure of ₹ 40,00,000/- during survey. Thus, the appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. The facts of the case clearly reveal that the appellant tried to evade payment of taxes by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, I hold that the AO was fully justified in levying the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The penalty levied by the AO is upheld. This ground of appeal is rejected. 8. Keeping in view of the aforesaid finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we are of the considered view that the AO has passed the assessment order wherein the AO has recorded his satisfaction on the page 2, 2nd para viz. I am satisfied that it is a fit case for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income/concealment of income. Further the AO vide his Notice dated 31.12.2007 for initiating the penalty and directed the assessee to appear before him at - .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →