Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2025 (1) TMI 90

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erred to as 'the Act') on 17/03/2020 for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal, the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the levy of penalty u/s. 271AAB of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The return of income was originally filed for A.Y. 2016-17 u/s. 139(1) of the Act and on 17.10.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 3,89,57,710/-. Pursuant to the search and seizure operation conducted on 29.12.2015, the assessee declared additional income of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- on account of investment in construction / .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... roduced here under :- 7. Be that as it may, the regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 13.8.2014, in which, it has been mentioned that penalty proceedings under Section 271AAB of the Act would be initiated separately. Pursuant to that, a notice was issued to the assessee, for which, the assessee filed his objections. The first and foremost objection was that the notice was vague and that it did not specify as to under which limb of the said provision, the Assessing Officer proposed to take action. The assessee also touched upon the merits of the case and sought to demonstrate as to how the penalty was not leviable. 8. The Assessing Officer did not agree with the stand taken by the assessee and held that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er, dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and allowed the cross objection filed by the assessee. Thus, the Revenue is before us by way of these appeals. 11. The argument of Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior the Revenue is that the notice issued by the Assessing Officer while imposing penalty clearly stated that it was a notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 271AAB of the Act. Therefore, the assessee was aware that he had to face penalty proceedings initiated under Section 271AAB of the Act. That part, the assessee submitted two replies and was also heard in person and thereafter penalty was imposed. Hence, it is submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal setting aside the penalty in its entirety is not sustainable. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The proposal for such penalty proceedings was separately initiated upon completion of assessment and there may be cases where the assessee would not even contest the order of assessment. But, that would not preclude the assessee from challenging the penalty proceedings, as penalty proceedings are independent and the procedure required to be followed cannot be dispensed with. 15. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the assessee, assessee, Section S 271AAB of the Act, which deals with penalty consists of three contingencies. Therefore, the Assessing Officer should point out to the assessee as to under which of the three clauses, he chooses to proceed against the assessee so as to enable the assessee to give an effe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the cases of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory and SSA's Emerald Meadows and the decision of this Court in the case of Babuji Jacob clearly support our above conclusion. For all the above reasons, we find no grounds to interfere with the common order passed by the Tribunal. 18. Accordingly, the above tax case appeals are dismissed confirming the common impugned order passed by the Tribunal. No costs. Consequently, the connected CMP is also dismissed. 6. For the sake of convenience, the show cause notice issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271AAB of the Act dated 09.02.2018 and 02.03.2020 are reproduced here in under :- 7. From the notices it is very clear that the Ld. AO had not mentioned the specific limb on which the penalty proceedings u/ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates