TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1793X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of mind and thus , assessee was deprived of the opportunity to respond to the show cause notice in a proper manner as the assessee was not aware of the specific charge on which the penalty was proposed to be levied. We have carefully perused the decisions relied upon by the counsel in the case of Shivkumar Devidutt Saraf, HUF vs. ITO [ 2018 (4) TMI 1786 - ITAT MUMBAI] and M/s. Quikr India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT [ 2019 (1) TMI 1573 - ITAT MUMBAI] wherein under similar set of facts the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal has held that no penalty can be imposed in such cases where the AO has passed the order in a mechanical manner. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.7273/M/2018 - - - Dated:- 20-2-2019 - Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Mem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order was for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income with a view to concealment of income. c. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and also in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of penalty, without appreciating that the appellant had offered satisfactory explanation which was substantiated by the documentary evidence placed on record, and that therefore, there was no basis for imposition of the penalty under section 271(l)(c) of the Act. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the Ld. AO's order imposing the penalty of ₹ 6,66,104/- u/s. 271fl)(c) of the Act be quashed and the penalty be cancelled. Your appellant craves leave to alter, modify, amend or delete the above grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cealment of income on the basis of concrete information and material on record. In para 4(e) the AO stated that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act were attracted for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and finally imposed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act by invoking explanation 4 to section 271 of the Act equal to 100% of the tax sought to be evaded. 5. The Ld. A.R. vehemently submitted before us that there was a complete non application of mind on the part of the AO as is apparent from the facts of the case. The Ld. A.R. referred to the assessment order passed by the AO wherein the penalty proceedings were initiated under section 271(1)(c) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a clerical mistake on the part of the AO and can not vitiate the penalty proceedings . 7. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record including the decisions cited by the assessee that while passing the assessment order the AO has initiated the penalty for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income with a view to concealment of income. The notice u/s 271(1) was issued on 28.12.2016 in a standard format without mentioning the one of the two limbs or one of the two charges on which the penalty was proposed to be levied. Finally the penalty was imposed by AO invoking explanation 4 to section 271(1)(c) of the Act which is applicable in the case of concealment of income. It is clear from the above that AO ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
