TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 790X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cifying which of the two contraventions, the assessee is guilty of was defective and the penalty imposed in pursuance of such defective notice was not sustainable. To arrive at this conclusion in the case of BIJOY KUMAR AGARWAL [ 2019 (6) TMI 721 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] as relied on the decision of Amrit Foods vs Commissioner of Central Excise UP [ 2005 (10) TMI 96 - SUPREME COURT as well as DR. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring a total income of ₹ 4,11,440/-. The said return was initially processed by the AO u/s 143(1) on 27.06.2015. The assessment however was subsequently reopened by him and in the assessment completed u/s 143(3)/147 vide an order dated 28.11.2017, addition of ₹ 9,11,212/- was made by the AO to the total income of the assessee on account of short term capital gain arising from the sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he respondent department after hearing the learned counsel for the assessee and perusing the relevant material available on record. The learned counsel for the assessee has raised a preliminary issue challenging the very initiation of the penalty proceedings by the AO on the ground that the show cause notice issued by him u/s 274 without containing the specific charge as to whether the assessee wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon ble Kolkata High Court relied on the decision of Amrit Foods vs Commissioner of Central Excise UP reported in (2005) 13 SCC 419 as well as decision in the case of PCIT vs Dr. Dr. Murari Mohan Koley (ITAT No. 306 of 2017 dated 18.07.2018). The issue raised by the assessee in the present appeal thus is squarely covered by the said judicial pronouncements and respectfully following the same, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
