9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the Assessing Officer was not sure as to whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Accordingly levy of penalty suffers from non-application of mind. In the background of the aforesaid legal position and, having regard to the manner in which the Assessing Officer has issued notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 15.1.2014 without striking off the irrelevant words, the penalty proceedings show a non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer and is, thus, unsustainable. Also see COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR. VERSUS M/S SSA'S EMERALD MEADOWS [2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SUPREME COURT] - decided in favour of assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... January, 2017 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (CC No.11485/2016)/73 taxmann.com 248 (SC) has held that Omission by the AO to explicitly specify in the penalty notice as to whether penalty proceedings are being initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars or for concealment of income makes the penalty order liable for cancellation. Hence, he submitted that penalty of ₹ 8,36,592/- imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s.271(1)(c) is, therefore, liable to be cancelled. 6. The Departmental Representative relied on the decision reported in K.P.Madhusudhanan vs. CIT [2001] 118 Taxman 324 (SC)/[2001] 251 ITR 99 (SC)/ [2001] 169 CTR 489 (SC); Union of India vs Dharamendra Textile Processors / 2007) 295 ITR 244; CIT vs Zoom Communicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are being initiated for furnishing oj inaccurate particulars or that for concealment of income makes the penalty order liable for cancellation even when it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the assessee had concealed income in the facts and circumstances of the case? ( 2 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in. holding that the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is had in law and. invalid inspite the amendment of Section 271(1 B) with retrospective effect and by virtue of the amendment, the assessing officer has initiated the penalty by properly recording the satisfaction for the same? ( 3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income , so as to provide adequate opportunity to the assessee to explain the show cause notice. Rather notice in this case has been issued in a stereotyped manner without applying any mind which is bad in law, hence is not a valid notice sufficient to impose penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 10. The penalty provisions of section 27l(1)(c) of the Act are attracted where the assessee has concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. It is also a well-accepted proposition that the aforesaid two limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act carry different meanings. Therefore, it was imperative for the Assessing Officer to strike- off the irrelevan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
