| |
The Tax PublishersITA No. 4489/Mum/2017
2019 TaxPub(DT) 4330 (Mum-Trib)INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
Perusal of show-cause notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) on record revealed that neither appropriate clause was marked nor appropriate lime was ticked, for which penalty proceedings werebeing initiated against assessee, i.e., whether assessee had concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income keeping the assessee in dark would snatch assessee's valuable right to defend penalty proceedings in defiance to the principle of natural justice, therefore, penalty levied on the basis of such defective notice could not be sustained.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars - Non-specification of particular charge in penalty notice -
Assessee challenged penalty levied by AO under section 271(1)(c) on the ground of non-specification of particular charge of offence in notice issued under section 274 read with 271(1)(c). Held: Perusal of show-cause notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) on record revealed that neither appropriate clause was marked nor appropriate lime was ticked, for which penalty proceedings were being initiated against assessee, i.e., whether assessee had concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income keeping the assessee in dark would snatch assessee's valuable right to defend penalty proceedings in defiance to the principle of natural justice, therefore, penalty levied on the basis of such defective notice could not be sustained.
Relied:CIT v. Samson Perinchery (2017) 88 Tqaxmann.com 413 : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 672 (Bom-HC) and CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 92013) 359 ITR 565 (Karn) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 202 (Karn-HC). Distinguished:Jain Brothers v. UOI (1970) 77 ITR 107 (Sc) : 1970 TaxPub(DT) 246 (SC).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2012-13
IN THE ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|