2019 (6) TMI 670 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non specification of charge - HELD THAT - AO did not specify for which act of charge or offence, the penalty was initiated, respectfully following the decision of SMT. BAISETTY REVATHI 2017 (7) TMI 776 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT the notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) is to be held as invalid. Accordingly, we quash the notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) and cancel the orders of the lower authorities and allow the appeal of the assessee. Since we have quashed the notice and cancelled the consequent orders of lower authorities, we consider it is not necessary to adjudicate the other grounds raised by the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Admission of additional grounds by the Appellate Tribunal.
2. Validity of penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Admission of Additional Grounds
The Appellate Tribunal considered the additional grounds raised by the assessee during the appeal hearing, arguing that these grounds were purely legal issues and did not require any specific investigation. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's representative that these additional grounds should be admitted. The grounds raised by the assessee pertained to the ambiguity in the penalty notice issued by the Assessing Officer and the validity of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c).

Issue 2: Validity of Penalty Notice
The primary contention raised by the assessee was regarding the ambiguity in the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice did not specify whether the penalty was imposed for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Appellate Tribunal observed that the notice lacked clarity on the specific charge for which the penalty was proposed to be levied, rendering it invalid. The Tribunal referred to a similar case and a decision of the jurisdictional High Court, emphasizing that the Assessing Officer must clearly state the grounds for initiating penalty proceedings to afford the assessee an opportunity to contest the charges. The Tribunal concluded that the ambiguity in the notice made it unsustainable, leading to the quashing of the notice and the cancellation of the penalty orders by the lower authorities.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee based on the invalidity of the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal's decision was guided by the principle that clear and unambiguous grounds must be specified when initiating penalty proceedings to ensure the assessee's right to contest the charges effectively.