9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MI 608 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT (LB)] where the non striking of the irrelevant limb would vitiate the penalty proceeding. Thus, we hold that the impugned notice issued by the ld. A.O. is null and void and, hence, direct the ld. A.O. to delete the impugned penalty. Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri Amarjit Singh, AM And Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, JM For the Assessee : Shri Rajesh P. Shah For the Respondent : Shri B. Laxmi Kanth ORDER PER KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, J M: This appeal has been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-54, Mumbai ( ld.CIT(A) for short), passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Year ( A.Y. for short) 2012-13. 2. The assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income dated 24.01.2013 declaring total income at Rs. 19,21,260/-. Pursuant to the search action carried out in the case of Thakkar Group dated 10.08.2011, where the assessee s case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were duly issued and served upon the assessee. The learned Assessing Officer ('ld. A.O.' for short) had passed the assessment order dated 27.03.2014, declaring total income at Rs. 55,08,510/- after making an addition of Rs. 26,98,498/- and Rs. 10,02,226/- (on protective basis) as unexplained jewellery u/s. 69A of the Act found during search proceedings. The ld. A.O. also initiated penalty proceeding u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and vide order dated 23.03.2022 levied impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the materials available on record. It is observed that the ld. A.O. had levied the penalty for both furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of income in the present case and the same is also substantiated by the impugned notice dated 21.03.2014 where the ld. A.O. has failed to strike out the irrelevant limb. The ld. AR has relied on the Full Bench decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mohammed Farhan A. Shaikh vs. CIT [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bom) which has held that the striking off the irrelevant limb is a mandatory condition or requirement to be followed by the ld. A.O. while issuing the penalty notice and the failure to do so would vitiate the said proceedings. The ld. DR, on the other hand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
