TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 604X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Insurance Company Ltd., [ 2019 (8) TMI 409 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and M/s. SSA Emerald Meadows reported [ 2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SC ORDER] set aside the Orders of the authorities below in same circumstances and cancelled the penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA.No.4442/Del./2016 - - - Dated:- 11-10-2019 - Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate. For the Revenue : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Gurgaon, Dated 14.06.2016 for the A.Y. 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, penalty is liable to be cancelled. He has submitted that issue is covered by the Orders of ITAT, Delhi C-Bench in the case of Shri Gulshan Kumar Jhurani, New Delhi vs., ACIT, Circle-37(1), New Delhi, Dated 04.10.2019 in ITA.No.704/Del./2015 and Hemla Embroidery Mills Private Ltd., Faridabad vs., DCIT, Circle-1, Faridabad, Dated 04.10.2019 in ITA.No.4747/Del/ 2016 in which the Tribunal following the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court as well as Hon ble Supreme Court, have cancelled the penalty on identical facts. 4. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and submitted that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.704/Del./2015 Assessment Year 2010-2011 Shri Gulshan Kumar Jhurani, B-226A, Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi. PIN 110 048. PAN ACHPJ2336H vs., The ACIT, Circle 37 (1), New Delhi. PIN 110 001. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A. For Revenue : Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmitted that the issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., 2019 (8) TMI 409 (Del.) vide Judgment Dated 02.08.2019 in paras 21 and 22 held as under : 21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1) (c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notice issued by the AO would be bad in law if it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1) (c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated under i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of CIT vs. M/s. SSAs Emerald Meadows 73 taxmann.com 241 (Kar.) and confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court reported in 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC). Further, the Hon ble Delhi High court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., (supra) decided the same issue in favour of the assessee. Following the same, we are of the view that since notice is bad in law, therefore, the entire penalty proceedings are vitiated and as such no penalty is leviable against the assessee. We, accordingly, set aside the Orders of the authorities below and cancel the penalty. 7. In the result, appeal of assessee allowed. 5.1. Same view have been taken by ITAT, Delhi C Bench in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
