TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Insurance Corporation of India Ltd. [ 2019 (8) TMI 409 - DELHI HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that notice issued for imposing the penalty would be bad in law if it does not satisfy the specific charge under which the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e. for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Same is also the decision in CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton Ginning Factory [ 2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that the notice issued by the AO would be bad in law if it did not specify for which limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, penalty proceedings are initiated. Also see M/S SSA S EMERALD MEADOWS [ 2015 (11) TMI 1620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] As AO levied penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee submitted a return on 27.02.2015 declaring long term capital gain and other interest income at ₹ 1,49,09,772/-. After the examination of the claim of the assessee the ld. Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act on 30th March, 2015 at the returned income of the assessee at ₹ 1,49,09,770/-. In the assessment order AO mentioned that penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act are being initiated separately. Consequently, on 30th March, 2015 notice was issued under Section 274 of the Act wherein none of the twin charges i.e. concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income was struck off. The assessee did not furnish any reply in response to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... particulars of income. The notice issued on 30th March, 2015 placed at page 3 of the paper book clearly shows that none of the twin charges have been struck off by the AO. The penalty order shows that penalty is levied for furnishing inaccurate particulars of its income. Appellate order against the penalty order shows that penalty has been confirmed on the charge of the concealment of income. The ld. CIT (Appeals) relied upon Explanation (3) to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act to hold that assessee has concealed particulars of income. Thus, it is apparent that at the time of assessment order and issue of show cause notice for levy of penalty the assessee was not made aware about any specific charge. In the penalty order the AO levied penalty fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
