9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1089X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as dismissed the SLP filed by the Revenue by observing that there is no merit in the petition of the revenue upholding the order of Hon ble High Court [ 2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SC ORDER] wherein the decision of the coordinate division bench in the case of CIT Vs Manjunatha Cotton Ginning Factory [ 2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has been followed. In all the above decision it has been held that non mentioning of relevant limb or non striking off of irrelevant limb in the penalty notice is a substantive defect in the imitation of proceedings itself and the consequent penalty levied on the basis of such defective notice can not be sustained. In view of these facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to set aside the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n a mechanical manner and in standard format as it does not specify the limb on which the penalty was proposed to be levied. 4. At the outset, the ld counsel for the assessee submitted before the bench that the AO has issued show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 31.03.2015 calling upon the assessee to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income a copy of which is placed at page no. 1 of the PB. The ld counsel Shri S.K. Tulsyan argued that the said notice has been issued in a standard format and in a mechanical manner without application of mind by the AO. The ld counsel argued that the notice has been issued without in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nical manner and in standard format without mentioning one of the two limbs on which the penalty was proposed to be levied. The AO finally imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act of Rs. 4,04,350/- being 100% of the tax sought to be evaded by the assessee for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and concealment of income. The ld CIT(A) confirmed the order of AO imposing the penalty by holding that the imposition of penalty is imperative once the it is established that assessee has deliberately and consciously furnished in accurate particulars of income. We note that even ld CIT(A) has also failed to appreciate the legal issue and messed up both limbs together and therefore we are not in agreement with the conclusion of the ld CIT(A). We pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
