TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER Per V. DURGA RAO, Judicial Member: This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [CIT(A)]-1, Guntur dated 20. 12. 2017 for the assessment year 2014-15. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. In the light of the facts and circumstances, was the Ld. CIT(A) correct in admitting additional ground of appeal, since adequate opportunity was ought to be given to the AO under the doctrine of natural principles of justice? 2. In the light of the facts and circumstances, was the Ld. CIT(A) correct in allowing the additional ground of appeal is purely legal, since the additional ground of appeal involved examination of material evidence and also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akshmi 40, 00, 000 3 . Investment in M/s Viswanatha Constructions 47, 48, 276 4 . Advance to Arla Ranga Rao, Guntur 14, 00, 000 5 . Investment in Residential Building 10, 00, 000 6 . Unexplained expenditure in construction projects 1, 84, 89, 762 Total 4, 21, 38, 038 3. The assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 29. 11. 2014 admitting total income of ₹ 4, 21, 48, 620/-. The return filed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer (AO) has issued a notice u/s 274 r. w. s. 271(1)(c) of I. T. Act, 1961 dated 31. 05. 2016 to the assessee to show cause as to why the penalty should not be made u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. In response to the notice issued by the AO, the assessee has filed a detailed reply on 10. 06. 2016. The AO after considering the explanation given by the assessee has imposed penalty of ₹ 10, 29, 360/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) and raised an addition ground of appeal that the notice issued by the AO to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of I. T. Act, 1961 dated 31. 05. 2016 is not clear that whether the assessee concealed the particulars of income or furnished th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ive and the same has to be quashed. The Ld. CIT(A) after examining the notice issued by the AO dated 31. 05. 2016 and also by considering the Hon ble Supreme Court judgement in the case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (242 Taxmann 180) and also Hon ble jurisdictional High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in the case of Smt. Baisetty Revathi in ITTA No. 684 of 2016 dated 13. 7. 2017 has held that penalty proceedings are invalid for the reason that charge is not clear. For the sake of convenience, the relevant portion of the order is extracted as under : On principle, when penalty, proceedings are sought to be initiated by the revenue under Section 271(1) (c) of the Act of 1961, the specific ground which forms the foundat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
