| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 5760 (Pune-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
Where the AO failed to mention specific charge as to which limb of section 271(1)(c) was attracted and give proper SCN to the assessee in this regard, then the levy of penalty suffered from infirmity. Moreover, it could not be the case of Revenue that initiation would be on one limb and imposition of penalty on the other limb.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Leviability - Non-recording of proper satisfaction and absence of proper SCN -
Issue arose was where the AO failed to mention specific charge for initiating penalty proceedings and/or if he had recorded satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings for non-fulfillment of one of the limbs of section 271(1)(c) and while levying penalty either penalty was levied for the default of both limbs or there was mention of none of the limbs or there was mention of contrary limb as to what it was initiated for, then whether penalty levied in such cases could be sustained in the eyes of law. Held: Where the AO failed to mention specific charge as to which limb of section 271(1)(c) was attracted and give proper SCN to the assessee in this regard, then the levy of penalty suffered from infirmity. Moreover, in some cases, penalty has been levied for non-fulfillment of both limbs of section 271(1)(c) and/or for one of the limbs and in some cases, no limb was mentioned, such orders levying penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not stand in the eyes of law.
Relied on:Samson Perinchery (2017) 392 ITR 4 (Bom) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 0672 (Bom-HC)
REFERRED : T Ashok Pai v. CIT (2007) 292 ITR 11 (SC) : 2007 TaxPub(DT) 1251 (SC), and Pr. CIT v. New Era Sova Mine [Tax Appeal Nos. 70, 69 of 2018 & 6 of 2019, dt. 18-6-2019]
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. :
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|