TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 493X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich limb of section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings have been initiated. In the present case the notice issued by the ld AO section 271(1)(c) is silent. Even otherwise in the assessment order passed the ld AO was not clear whether the penalty was leviable for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Thus, it was not discernable clearly in which limb the assessee was to be penalized. As in Virgo Marketing Pvt. Ltd [ 2008 (1) TMI 885 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has held that if one is unable to discern from the reading of the assessment order why the ld AO choose to initiate penalty proceedings against the assessee and under which limb the penalty proceedings cannot be upheld. In view of the above facts and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operation the assessee surrendered ₹ 8 Crore as per statement under section 132(4) dated 8-4- 2014 9-4-2014. 3) The assessee had declared 6.04 Crore in the returns of income filed for AY 2011-12 filed u/s 153A(1). 4) To fulfill the commitment made regarding surrender as per statement under section 234 the A.O made addition of ₹ 110 Lacs for A.Y. 2011-12 and 89,17,140 in A.Y. 2009-10. The assessee duly accepted the addition made by the Assessing Officer as he has already surrendered the amount in statement given u/s 132(4). 5) The assessee did not prefer any appeal since he wanted peace of mind wanted to avoid any litigation. 6) During Assessment proceeding the assessee furnished that he had agreed for add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cealing and furnishing inaccurate particulars of his income. 4. The assessee did not prefer any further appeal. 5. Therefore, the ld AO initiated penalty proceedings. In response to the penalty proceedings the assessee submitted that assessee has accepted this addition and explained the entries of the disclosures. No documentary evidence etc are found during search. Assessee also stated that it has accepted the addition to buy peace and to avoid further litigation. The ld AO rejected the contentions of the assessee stating that assessee has concealed income of ₹ 8917140/- and levied a penalty of ₹ 2860160/- by the order dated 30.09.2013. 6. The assessee preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A) who confirmed the same and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment order did not specify any one limb of the reason for levy of penalty. In the assessment order he initiated the penalty proceedings stating that assessee is liable for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealing and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In the show cause notice issued u/s 274 of the Act read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 25.03.2013 he has not struck off any of the twin charges. At the time of passing the penalty order the ld AO has levied the penalty for concealment of the income. The ld AR has relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT Vs. Sahara India Life insurance Company Ltd 2019 (8) TMI-409. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the above decision relying upon the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
