9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1612X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee has committed for which penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act has been initiated, therefore, following the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court’s order in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT) and SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SUPREME COURT), we confirm the order of ld. CIT(A) in allowing the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, appeal of the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bad in law and drew our attention to notice dated 11.01.2013 to point out that the notice did not specify for which charge the penalty is being initiated. We find that the notice u/s. 274 of the Act r.w.s. 271 of the Act dated 11.01.2013 served on the assessee wherein we note that the AO has not struck down the limb of charge/default for which the assessee is being served with the penalty notice. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), to be bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal, while allowing the appeal of the assessee, has relied on the dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to which default the assessee has committed for which penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act has been initiated, therefore, following the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court's order in Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (supra) and SSA's Emerald Meadows (supra), we confirm the order of ld. CIT(A) in allowing the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 4. In the result, app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
