9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Considering the binding judgments such penalty order is unsustainable in law legally. AO is under obligation to specify the correct limb at the time of initiation as well as at the time of levy of penalty. Penalty order is liable to be quashed on this legal issue. Thus, the order of CIT(A) is set-aside and direct the AO to delete the penalty. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed. - ITA No. 2498/PUN/2016 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2018 - Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM And Shri D. Karunakara Rao, AM For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Amit Dua, JCIT ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This is the appeal filed by assessee against the order of CIT(A)-2, Nashik, dated 19.08.2016 for the A.Y. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny time before or at the time of hearing. 3. Briefly stated relevant facts include that the assessee is an individual and filed the return of income on 13.06.2006 declaring total income of ₹ 99,753/-. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) on 06.09.2007. Assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 10.12.2008 determining the assessed income at ₹ 453,190/-. The Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act. The First Appellate Authority confirmed the additions. However, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer. At the end of the set assessment proceedings, AO assessed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equirement of making a specific reference to the specific limb of clause (c) of section 271(1) of the Act and relying on various binding judgments in the case CIT Vs. Shri Samson Perinchery (2017) 392 ITR 4 (Bom.) as well as the judgment of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 are not met by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the penalty levied by the AO is unsustainable in law due to deficiency with respect to the issue of valid satisfaction. 8. Recording of valid/ proper satisfaction by the AO is the issue here in this appeal. We perused the order of the AO and find the satisfaction recorded by the AO for initiating the penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act is re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
