9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 467X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.Y. 2012-13. 2. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the penalty proceeding does not fulfill the criteria laid down u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Furthermore, the Learned AO while imposing penalty mentioned both the limbs being furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of income, which is vague and ambiguous too and hence the penalty is invalid and liable to be quashed as urged by the Ld. AR. The Learned AO since neither specified the alleged guilt committed by the assessee by furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income the same is nothing but non application of mind as submitted by the Learned AR. In support of his a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, admittedly we do not find any specific allegation made against the assessee. It appears that the Ld. ITO imposed the penalty of Rs. 1,77,782/-upon being satisfied on both the limbs of guilt committed by the assessee being concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. But Sec. 271(1)(c) puts the bar in initiating as well as levying penalty on both the limbs by the revenue and restricted initiation and imposition of penalty on the specific guilt committed by the assessee, either for concealment on income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 6. We have considered the judgment passed by the Jurisdictional High Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orded that "I am of the opinion that it will have to be said that the assessee had concealed its income and/or that it had furnished inaccurate particulars of such income." It was in this respect the Bench observed that "Now the language of "and/or" may be proper in issuing a notice as to penalty order or framing of charge in a criminal case or a quasi-criminal case, but it was incumbent upon the IAC to come to a positive finding as to whether there was concealment of income by the assessee or whether any inaccurate particulars of such income had been furnished by the assessee. No such clear cut finding was reached by the IAC and, on that ground alone, the order of penalty passed by the IAC was liable to be struck down." Thus, it appears t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
