TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer while issuing the penalty notice. See CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory [2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No.368/Del/2014 - - - Dated:- 5-4-2018 - SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. Sunil Arora, CA For The Respondent : Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. DR ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 {CIT (A)}, New Delhi for assessment year 2008-09 wherein vide the impugned order dated 20.12.2013, the Ld. CIT (A) has upheld the imposition of penalty of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted that the notice u/s 274 dated 7.12.2010 issued by the A.O. did not specify as to under which limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings were being initiated. The Ld. AR drew our attention to the copy of the said notice appearing on page No. 22A of the paper book filed by the assessee. He also drew our attention to the assessment order dated 7.12.2010 wherein it was mentioned that since the assessee had concealed its income, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act were being initiated separately. He also drew our attention to the penalty order dated 22.6.2011 wherein it has been specified that the penalty was being imposed for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Ld. AR sought to highlight the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7.12.2010 for the impugned year that the Assessing Officer has not specifically specified as to under which limb of Section 271(l)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated by him, i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton Ginning Factory, reported in 359 ITR 565 (Kar)has held as under: ( p) Notice under section 274 of the Act should specifically state the grounds mentioned in Section 271(l)(c), i.e., whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. ( q) Sending printed form where all the ground mentioned in Section 271 are me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 274 without taking into consideration the assessment order when the assessing officer has specified that the 'assessee has concealed particulars of income? 3. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee holding the notice issued by the Assessing Officer under Section 274 read with Section 271(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act. 1961 for short 'the Act') to be bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271 (l)(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 The Tribunal, while allowing the appeal of the assessee, has relied on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court rendered, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
