2022 (6) TMI 832 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice - HELD THAT - Penalty was levied on the basis of concealment of income but we observed that the penalty notice u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act is issued without indicating on what basis the penalty proceedings was initiated. Normally, we fall back in such situation to the Assessment Order in which AO normally indicate on what basis penalty proceedings will be initiated. In this case we observed that in Assessment Order AO has indicated that penalty proceedings will be initiated on the basis of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income whereas we observed that the penalty was levied ultimately on concealment of income. It clearly shows that Assessing Officer is not clear on what basis the penalty proceedings were initiated and completed. The facts are clearly falls under the category of issue of improper notice. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mohd Farhan A Shaikh 2021 (3) TMI 608 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT in which the penalty proceedings initiated based on the improper notice is bad in law. Accordingly, penalty levied by the Assessing Officer is accordingly, deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Delay in filing the appeal due to COVID-19 and issues with the Income Tax Department portal.
2. Validity of penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
3. Disallowance of claim under section 10B of the Income Tax Act and imposition of penalty.

Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal due to COVID-19 and portal issues:
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after a delay of 564 days, attributing it to the COVID-19 pandemic and technical issues with the Income Tax Department portal. Both parties acknowledged the disruptions caused by the pandemic. The Appellate Tribunal, after considering the circumstances, condoned the delay and admitted the appeal for adjudication.

Issue 2: Validity of penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act:
The appellant challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) on the grounds of improper initiation of penalty proceedings. The Assessing Officer failed to specify the basis for initiating the penalty proceedings in the notice issued, leading to confusion. While the Assessment Order mentioned initiating penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, the penalty was ultimately levied for concealment of income. Citing a case law, the appellant argued that the penalty notice was defective, and the penalty order did not align with the legal provisions. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, the Appellate Tribunal found the notice to be improper and held that penalties based on such notices are invalid. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer was deleted.

Issue 3: Disallowance of claim under section 10B and imposition of penalty:
The appellant contended that the disallowance of the claim under section 10B of the Income Tax Act was unjustified as it was a bona fide claim made during the filing of the income tax return. The denial of the claim was based on a subsequent court decision that added a new condition for availing the deduction, which was not known at the time of filing. The appellant argued that the disallowance of a genuine claim does not amount to either furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income, the essential elements for imposing a penalty under section 271(1)(c). The appellant provided legal arguments and case laws to support this position. Despite the Department's reliance on lower authorities' orders, the Appellate Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments and deleted the penalty imposed, allowing the appeal.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, primarily due to the improper initiation of penalty proceedings and the subsequent invalidity of the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clarity in penalty notices and aligned penalty orders, highlighting the necessity for proper adherence to legal procedures in tax assessments and penalties.