9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n all the above captioned four appeals, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The common grievance in all these appeals relates to the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act' for short], though the quantum of penalty differs in the captioned appeals. 4. In the captioned appeals, the assessee has raised an additional ground which reads as under: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is void as the notice u/s 271(1)(c) is bad and defective as it is issued without deleting the appropriate clause under which the penalty proposed to be imposed either ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Assessment Years, reads as under: "NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271(1)(c) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 Dated: 20/06/2014i To, M/S HIMANSHU MEDICARE PVT. C-30, PANCHSHEEL ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI -17 Whereas in the course of proceedings before me for the Assessment Year 2010-11, it appears to me that you * have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such Income You are hereby requested to appear before me at Room No. 364,3rd Floor, ARA Centre, Jhandewalnn Extention, New Delhi at 11 A.M. /P.M. On 23/07/2014 and show cause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made u/s 271 of the Income-^ax Act: 1961. If you do hot with to avail yourself of this opportunity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice 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. 13. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. ITA No. 475/2019 order dated 02.08.2019 while deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd [supra] and SSA Emerald Meadows [supra]. 16. In view of what has been discussed above, following the decisions rendered by Hon'ble High Courts discussed in the preceding paras and without entering into the other aspects of the case, we are of the considered view that when the very initiation of the penalty by way of issuance of vague and ambiguous notices u/s 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Act without specifically charging the assessee if he has concealed the particulars of income or has furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, subsequent penalty proceedings are not sustainable, hence penalty levied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
