9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 681X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3) TMI 1026 - ITAT AGRA]. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A No.289/Agra/2018 - - - Dated:- 17-2-2020 - Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member, And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri R.C. Tomar, ITP For the Respondent : Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR. ORDER PER DR. M.L. MEENA, A.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessees against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) challenging the common issue regarding validity of penalty order on account of defective show cause notice without any specific charge for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) issued by the AO in view of the decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton Ginning Factory [2013] 35 taxmann.com 250. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set, the counsel for the assessee, drawn our attention to the copy of the notice dated 18/02/2014 issued u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the act (APB, Pg. 1) and contended that the penalty so imposed and sustained at ₹ 354013/- by the C.I.T. (A) on the basis of such defective notice issued u/s 271(l)(c) which did not specify the particular limb of sec. 271(l)(c) of the Act i.e. whether it is for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, is illegaland thatin view of ratio laid down by hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunath Cotton and Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 and followed by I.T.A.T. Agra Bench in the cases of Shri Sachin Arora Others in ITA 118/Agra/2015 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee and also the argument of application of section 292B were raised by the revenue as noted herein above however in our respectful understanding the said arguments were considered by the coordinate bench in the matter of Sachin Arora thereafter had decided the appeals in favour of the assessee. Although we are impressed by the reasoning given by the revenue at the first instance however when we have considered the decision rendered by the coordinate bench in the matter of Sachin Arora (supra), we fail to follow the reasoning given by the revenue as we are bound by the authoritative pronouncement made by the coordinate bench in the same set of facts. Moreover we are also of the opinion that the jurisdictional High Court in the matte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
