2023 (12) TMI 766

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 03/2017 passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:- "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the penalty levied by the Ld. A.O. u/s. 271(1)(c) for Rs. 4,48,381/-. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of Ld. A.O despite the fact that the Ld. AO has not mentioned the specific limb in the show cause notice issued u/s 274 as to whether penalty is proposed to be levied for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in uph .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Act was carried out at the office premises of the assessee. During the survey proceedings, statements of Directors of the assessee were recorded in which they offered to tax additional income on account of non-genuine expenditures over and above the income as per regular books of account. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer ("AO") vide order dated 04/03/2013 passed under section 143(3) of the Act made an addition of Rs. 6,28,80,474 to the total income of the assessee on account of bogus purchases on the basis of surrender during the aforesaid survey proceedings. Further, the AO disallowed uniform maintenance allowance claim by the assessee under section 37(1) of the Act. The AO also disallowed the depreciation claimed on television sets in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Act, furnished during the hearing, we find that the AO did not strike-off any of the twin charges i.e., concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v/s CIT, [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bom.), wherein the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Court has held that the defect in notice by not striking off the irrelevant matter would vitiate the penalty proceedings. Accordingly, respectfully following the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, the penalty order passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is quashed. 8. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is al .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X