9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar, hence are clubbed, heard and consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take-up the ITA No. 2445/Mum/2021 for the Asst. Year 2009-10 as a lead case and the facts narrated. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. Against penalty of Rs.2,03,650/- u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A)-30 National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)"] erred in confirming the penalty of Rs.2,03,650/- levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act, 1961. 2. Your appellant humbly submits that the notice u/s 274 r.w.s 271(1)(c) has not specified the exact charge for which the penalty was proposed to be levied. On t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Subsequently the notice U/sec142(1) of the Act along with the questionnaire was issued. The Assessing Officer to test check the genuineness of purchases has issued the notice u/s 133(6) of the Act on the parties and the said notices were returned un served by the postal authorities with the remarks " Not Known/Left". Further the A.O. has issued notice on the assessee to substantiate the transactions with the purchase bills, sales corresponding to transactions, statements, ledger accounts and sales bills etc. The assessee has submitted the details of the purchases. The A.O. was not satisfied with the explanations and the information as discussed on the issue in para-11 of the assessment order and relied on the judicial decisions and dealt on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecisions and paper book and prayed for allowing the appeal. 8. Contra, the Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the penalty though technicalities raised by the assessee in additional ground of appeal are devoid of merits and prayed for dismissal of the assessee appeal. 9. We heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue is that the assessee has challenged the levy of penalty on legal issue as the A.O. has not applied his mind and non striking of charge in the penalty notice i.e. whether the charge is for concealment of income or furnishing of in accurate particulars of income. The Ld.AR demonstrated the copy of penalty notice and the submissions are realistic. We find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... must stand on its own. These proceedings culminate under a deferent statutory scheme that remains distinct from the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the assessee must be informed of the grounds of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice. An omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vagueness. 182. More Particularly, a penal provision, even with civil consequences, must be construed strictly. And ambiguity, if any, must be resolved in the affected assessee's favour. 10. We have considered the facts, circumstances and ratio of the decision of Hon'ble High Court and are of the view that in the present case the A.O has not has not strike off the charge for levy of penalty for concealment of income or for furnishing of inaccura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
