9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1486X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... either for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 2. The Learned CIT (Appeal) erred in law in not maintaining judicial discipline in view of the trite law that no penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) lie in case of estimated income. 2. The grievance of the assessee is against imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, which has been confirmed by the learned CIT(A). 3. At the time of hearing before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee invited our attention to the show cause notice dated 27/3/2014 for levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It was submitted that from a perusal of this notice, it is crystal clear that the charge, for which the penalty is proposed to be levied under section 271( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l to the computation of his total income have been disclosed by him, then, the amount added or disallowed in computing the total income of such person as a result thereof shall, for the purposes of section 271(1)(c), be deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed; that therefore, since in the present case, the assessee has not been able to substantiate the explanation offered by him and has failed to prove such explanation to be bona fide, the concealment of particulars of income are to be deemed. 5. Heard. The show-cause notice in question is as follows: 6. From a perusal of this notice, it is crystal clear that the charge for which penalty is proposed to be levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of law to be decided. Thereafter, an SLP was filed before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Apex Court dismissed the SLP of the Revenue finding no merit therein and confirming the issue in favour of the assessee. 8. In 'CIT and Another vs. Manjunath Cotton & Ginning Factory', [2013] 359 ITR 565 (Karn.), it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court that notice under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act should specifically state the grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c) of the Act, i.e., whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Sending printed form, where all the grounds mentioned would not satisfy the requirement of law. The assessee should know the grounds which he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an authority for the issue under consideration before the Bench. The judgment explains the scope of Explanation- 1 appended to section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It has been held that the onus of the assessee will not get discharged by furnishing an explanation without any further proof; that in Explanation-1 to section 271(1)(c), the onus is the assessee; that where the AO issues a notice to the assessee, he makes the assessee aware that the provisions thereof are to be used against him and these provisions include Explanation-1 to section 271(1)(c); that where the returned income is less than 80% of the assessed income, the Explanation is automatically attracted. In the case under consideration, however, the issue is not about the applicabili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
