2025 (3) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d that the AO had expressed therein only for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c). Accordingly, it was held that the penalty levied u/s 271E of the Act could not be levied without recording of satisfaction in the assessment order as regards penalty under section 271E of the Act. Thus, AO having not recorded satisfaction that it was a case calling for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271E penalty order deserves to be set aside. Decided in favour of assessee.
SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM For the Appellant : Sh. Naman Maloo, C.A. For the Respondent : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT ORDER PER: Narinder Kumar, Judicial Member Assessee is before this Appellate Tribunal, feeling aggrieved b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sons recorded by Learned CIT(A), present appeal deserves to be dismissed, as it was found to be a case of violation of provisions of section 269T of the Act, attracting penalty u/s 271E of the Act. 5. A perusal of the assessment order dated 22.12.2016 would reveal that while parting with the assessment order at page 7 to 9 thereof, the Assessing Officer observed as under:- "The assessee has not maintained the books of accounts & the net income of Rs. 9,04,840/- declared by the assessee exceeds the limit prescribed u/s 44AD of the Income Tax Act 1961. Hence penalty proceedings u/s 271A of the Income Tax Act 1961 are being initiated separately. The assessee has not audited the books of accounts hence the assessee's turnover is above .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xtracted above, from the assessment order pertaining to quantum proceedings, it is obvious that the Assessing Officer nowhere recorded satisfaction that it was a case of violation of provisions of section 269T of the Act, calling for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271E of the Act. 7. In Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City's case (supra), Hon'ble Apex Court, while dealing with penalty order u/s 271E of the Act, observed that in the fresh assessment order, no satisfaction was recorded regarding penalty proceedings u/s 271E of the Act, and that the Assessing Officer had expressed therein only for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, it was held that the penalty levied u/s 271E of the Act could not be le .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X