9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 755X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... short 'the Act') qua the assessment year 2012-13 on the grounds inter alia that :- "1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs. 13,88,112/- and that too without assuming jurisdiction as per law and the impugned penalty order being illegal and void ab-initio and without considering the submissions of assessee and without observing the principles of natural justice. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in imposing penalty u/s 271 (1)(c), is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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, the entire addition has been made by the AO/confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) on the basis of estimated net profit @ 8% of the turnover by following his own order for Assessment Year 2010-11 which has since been set aside and net profit has been estimated @ 3% of the turnover. It is also not in dispute that following the order passed by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for AY 2010-11 order dated 21.04.2017, this Bench has also acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... F.NO.271(1)(c)/DCIT/Circle-1/GZB/2014-15/2253 Dt.05.02.2015 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. To Shri Alok Garg, Prop. Alok Builders, R-11/125, Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad. Whereas during the course of proceedings before me for the assessment year 2012-13 it appears to me that you:- * Have without reasonable cause failed to furnish merturn of income which you were required to furnish by a notice given under section 139(1) or by a notice given u/s 139(2)/148/142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated......... or have without reasonable cause failed to furnish within the time allowed and in the manner required by the said section 139(1) or by such notice. * Have without reasonable cause failed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT vs. SSA's Emerala Meadows - (2016) 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC) while dismissing the SLP filed by the Revenue quashing the penalty by the Tribunal as well as Hon'ble High Court on ground of unspecified notice has held as under:- "Section 274, read with section 271(1)(c), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - Procedure for imposition of (Conditions precedent) - Assessment year 2009-10 - Tribunal, relying on decision of Division Bench of Karnataka High Court rendered in case of CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory [2013] 359 1TR 565/218 Taxman 423/35 taxmann.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 wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns rendered in the cases of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory, CIT vs. SSA's Emerala Meadows and Pr. CIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. (supra), we are of the considered view that when the notice issued by the AO is bad in law being vague and ambiguous having not specified under which limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings initiated u/s 271(1)(c) are not sustainable. 13. Even the AO has failed to apply his mind at the time of recording satisfaction at the time of framing assessment to initiate the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act as to under which limb of section 271(1)(c) i.e. for concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income, penalty proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been brought on record by the AO that the assessee concealed any particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income, It cannot be said that the addition made in the hands of the assessee was on account of any concealment by the assessee. Therefore, the provisions of s. 271(1)(c) were not applicable to the facts of the present case. It cannot be said that in the case of assessee there was any fraud or gross willful neglect to return the correct income. In that view of the matter also the penalty was not leviable under s. 271 (1)(c). No penalty under s. 271 (1)(c) was leviable in the facts of the present case because in this case the income had been estimated and there was no concrete evidence that the assessee furnished ina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
