TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rejected. Following the above decisions, we are of the view that since the impugned show cause notices issued by the A.O. are bad in law, therefore, entire penalty proceedings are vitiated and as such, no penalty is leviable against the assessee. We, accordingly, set aside the Orders of the authorities below and cancel the penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA. Nos. 2627, 2628, 2629, 2630, 2631 & 2632/Del./2017 - - - Dated:- 11-10-2019 - Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Ms. Ashisha Mittal, C.A. And Shri Varun Jain, C.A. For the Revenue : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER BENCH : All the appeals by the same Assessee are directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idered the rival submissions. Recently we have decided appeal in the case of Shri Harish Chander Kapoor, Gurgaon vs., ITO, Ward-2(1), Gurgaon in ITA.No.4442/Del./2016, even Dated 11.10.2019 for the A.Y. 2012-2013, on identical facts. The findings of the Tribunal are as under : IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES C : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.4442/Del./2016 Assessment Year 2012-2013 Shri Harish Chander Kapoor, Prop. M/s. Lucky Enterprises, Gurgaon. PIN 122001 PAN AICPK4192K C/o. Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi. vs., The Income Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been received from you. You are hereby afforded another opportunity to show cause as to why the above penalty be not imposed upon you for the said default. 3.2. He has submitted that A.O. similarly in the assessment order has mentioned that he has satisfied that assessee has concealed his particulars/furnished inaccurate particulars of income. He has, therefore, submitted that A.O. has not mentioned in the above show cause notices as to under which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act have been initiated i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, penalty is liable to be cancelled. He has su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the Judgment of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs., M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., 2019 (8) TMI 409 (Del.) and Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. SSA Emerald Meadows reported in 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC) set aside the Orders of the authorities below in same circumstances and cancelled the penalty. The Order is reproduced as under : IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES C : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.704/Del./2015 Assessment Year 2010-2011 Shri Gulshan Kumar Jhurani, B-226A, Greater Kailash Part-1, New Delhi. PIN 110 048. PAN ACHPJ2336H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as issued for levy of penalty in which the A.O. has mentioned as under: Have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. 4.1. He has, therefore, submitted that the issue is covered by the Judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., 2019 (8) TMI 409 (Del.) vide Judgment Dated 02.08.2019 in paras 21 and 22 held as under : 21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1) (c) of the Act, which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Kar) and observed that the notice i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The issue is, therefore, covered by Judgment of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. SSAs Emerald Meadows 73 taxmann.com 241 (Kar.) and confirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court reported in 73 taxmann.com 248 (SC). Further, the Hon ble Delhi High court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., (supra) decided the same issue in favour of the assessee. Following the same, we are of the view that since notice is bad in law, therefore, the entire penalty proceedings are vitiated and as such no penalty is leviable against the assessee. We, accordingly, set aside the Orders of the authorities below and cancel the penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
