9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion as well as at the time of levy of penalty. In view of the above deliberation on this issue, without going into the merits of the case, we set-aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the entire penalty imposed by him. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No.138/RPR/2016 - - - Dated:- 16-5-2019 - Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Judicial Member And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri R. B. Doshi, Adv. For the Department : Shri Sanjay Kumar, JCIT ORDER PER DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, AM : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-II, Raipur (CG) dated 23.03.2016 relat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness income in the return of income thereof. In support of the case of the assessee, ld. counsel relied on the various judicial pronouncements on this issue. In support, he relied on the coordinate regular bench order in the case of Manoj Kumar Agrawal vs. DCIT vide ITA No.124/RPR/2015 for the assessment year 2005-06 dated 13.08.2018 (Copy placed on record). 5. The ld. DR for the Revenue, on the other hand, heavily relied on the orders of the authorities below. 6. Heard. On the similar facts of no specific charge the coordinate bench in the case of Manoj Kumar Agrawal vs. DCIT (supra) has deleted the entire penalty levied by Assessing Officer. The relevant paras 5 to 6 of the said order of the Tribunal (sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. 6. We find the SLP filed by the Revenue has been dismissed by the Hon ble Apex Court. Further, the various Benches of the Tribunal following the above decisions are cancelling the penalty so levied by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of non-striking of the inappropriate words from the notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act. Since in the instant case, the Assessing Officer has not struck off the inappropriate words in the notices issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271, therefore, the notice does not specify under which limb of section 271(1)(c) the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e. whether for concealment of income or for furnishing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
