TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by the revenue was dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has also taken note of the decision of AMSON PERINCHERY [ 2017 (1) TMI 1292 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and ultimately held that the show cause notice issued under Section 274 of the Act does not specify the charge against the assessee as to whether it is concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and, therefore, the show cause notice was defective. The decision of this Court in the case of Dr. Murari Mohan Koley (supra) will apply with full force. Thus we are of the considered view that the order passed by the Tribunal does not call for any interference. Accordingly, appeal fails and the substantial questions are answered a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause notice under section 274 in the printed form the irrelevant portion, viz. furnished inaccurate particulars of income or concealed particulars of such income was not struck off by the AO ? (b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law and fact in holding that the notices under Section 274 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were not in accordance with law ? (c) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, imposition of penalty is a civil consequence and is bereft of the fact as to whether it was deliberate or indeliberate concealment of income and furnishing of incarnate particulars and the CIT (A) as also the Tribunal erred in law in not appreciating th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned Counsel for the appellant/revenue and for the respondent /assessee we find that CIT (A) has examined the factual position more particularly the form of the notice and found that notice was defective and taking note of the various decisions of the other High Courts held that penalty could not have been imposed pursuant to such a defective notice. The revenue carried the matter to the Tribunal and Tribunal reexamined the matter and agreed with the view taken by the CIT(A). We find that the Tribunal rightly took note of the decision of the High Court in CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory reported at (359 ITR 565) as well as other decision. The finding rendered by the Tribunal is to the following effect :- (7) It is we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing Officer in the standard format without striking off the irrelevant portion as bad in law and the order passed in pursuance of such notice imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) was liable to be cancelled being invalid. The decision rendered by the Tribunal is in full consonance with the law laid down by the various High Court as well as Hon ble Supreme Court on the subject issue. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent has placed before us the decision of this case in the case of (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 19 Kolkata Vs.Dr. Murari Mohan Koley) dated 18th July 2018. In the said decision the Hon ble Division Bench took note of the various decisions including the decision in the case of Manjunatha C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
