TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 883X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of ld. CIT (A) by referring to the assessment record, as to the compliance of requirements of law in this regard. We are of the considered opinion that the matter should be remitted to the file of ld. CIT (A) who will consider this issue in detail after considering the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court referred above. We are not commenting on other aspects of merit in this case since we are remitting the grounds on the issue of jurisdiction, as otherwise it will lead to multiplication of proceedings - Appeal of assessee allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 2835/Del./2019 - - - Dated:- 7-6-2022 - SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as also considered the assessee s challenge that in the notice of penalty, the charge has not been specified. The order of ld. CIT(A) in this regard may be referred to as under :- Pages 10 and 11 6.2. The Ld.AR, without prejudice, further submitted that the AO was not specific as to under which limb, the AO was going to penalize the assessee or seek explanation of the assessee. In other way the appellant has challenged the validity of penalty proceedings on the ground that no specific charge i.e. whether the penalty was being proposed to be imposed for furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income was mentioned. 6.3 I have considered the technical issues raised by the Ld. AR. I have perused the assessment or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n assuming that there was some error in initiation of penalty proceeding, the penalty order is not vitiated in the facts and circumstances of the case in which penalty was initiated as well as imposed. These arguments are rejected. 4. We note that assessee s challenge to the issue of initiation of penalty proceedings under penalty notice goes to the core of the jurisdictional aspect. This aspect has been analyzed by various Hon ble High Courts and also by Hon ble Supreme Court. The Full Bench of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. DCIT (2021) 125 taxmann.com 253 (Bom.) has adjudicated the issue and has come to the conclusion that non-ticking of the limb of notice specifying charge under notice 271(1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
