2022 (5) TMI 838

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y the assessee: "1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the penalty order passed by the AO is bad both in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred both in law and on facts in upholding levy of penalty of Rs. 2,07,200/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts & in law in upholding the levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act without appreciating the fact that there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the appellant as contemplated u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts & in law in upholding levy of pen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ction 271(1)(c), penalty proceedings has been initiated i.e. either for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, which makes the penalty order passed without jurisdiction, which is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 8. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts & in law in justifying levy of penalty by arbitrary and mechanically applying the provisions of Explanation 5A of Section 271(1)(c) without appreciating the fact that no addition was made on the basis of any money, bullion, jewellery, other valuable article or document etc. found and seized during the search action carried under section 132 of the Act and therefore, provisions of Explanation 5A of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory: 359 ITR 565 held that notice under section 274 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 incorrect particulars of income. Sending printed form where all the grounds mentioned in section 271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. 2) Bombay High Court: Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs ACIT Section 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Non-striking off of the irrelevant part while issuing notice u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, order is bad in law. Assessee must be informed of the ground of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice. An omnibus notice suffers from the vice of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X