TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 782X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be leveled against him/her. Following the decisions rendered in the cases of CIT vs. SSA's Emerald Meadows [ 2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SC ORDER ] and Pr. CIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd.[ 2019 (8) TMI 409 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] we are of the considered view that when the notice issued by the AO is bad in law being vague and ambiguous one having not specified under which limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings are initiated u/s. 271(1)(c) are not sustainable. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 183/Del./2017 - - - Dated:- 13-1-2021 - N. K. Billaiya , Member ( A ) And Kuldip Singh , Member ( J ) For the Appellant : Somil Agarwal, Advocate For the Respondents : Vijay Choudhary , Sr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of loss. Declining the contention raised by the assessee, Assessing Officer levied the penalty of ₹ 4,14,470/- at the 100% of the tax sought to be evaded. 3. Assessee carried the matter by way of filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the penalty by dismissing the same. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 4. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Undisputedly assessee has accepted the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ON 274 READ WITH SECTION 271(1)(c) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 To, Dated: 05.01.2015 Ms. Katyayani Dalmia, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi-110011 PAN: AIUPD4826F Whereas in the course of proceedings before me for the assessment year 2012-13 it appears to me that you:- have concealed the particulars of your income against assessment year 2012-13 and furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. You are hereby requested to appear before me at 12.30 P.M. on 27.01.2015 and show cause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. If you do not wish to avail yourself of this opportunity of being heard in person or through authorized representati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n.com 250, allowed appeal of assessee holding that notice issued by Assessing Officer under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) was bad in law, as it did not specify under which limb of section 271(1)(c) penalty proceedings had been initiated, i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - High Court held that matter was covered by aforesaid decision of Division Bench and, therefore, there was no substantial question of law arising for determination - Whether since there was no merit in SLP filed by revenue, same was liable to be dismissed - Held, yes [Para 2] [In favour of assessee] 12. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Compan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case, I levy a penalty of ₹ 4,14,470/- being 100% of the tax sought to be evaded on concealment/inaccurate particulars of ₹ 20,11,991/- u/s. 271(1)(c) r.w. Explanation 1 of the Income-tax Act, 1561 in the case of the assessee for the AY 2012-13. 14. So even at the time of passing penalty order, AO was not aware enough as to whether he is levying the penalty for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. So initiating penalty proceedings on the basis of vague and ambiguous notice issued u/s. 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act is not sustainable in the eye of law, hence, order to be deleted. Consequently, appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed. Order pronounc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
