| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 6460 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
Where notice issued under section 271(1)(c) was bad in law being vague and ambiguous having not specified under which limb of section 271(1)(c), the penalty proceedings were initiated against assessee, the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) would not be sustainable.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Leviability - Defective notice - Non-specification of charge
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was imposed. It was contended on behalf of assessee that AO failed to specify in show-cause notice issued under section 271(1)(c) that the assessee concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income, therefore, the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) would not be sustainable. Held: Since notice issued under section 271(1)(c) was bad in law being vague and ambiguous having not specified under which limb of section 271(1)(c), the penalty proceedings were initiated against assessee, the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) would not be sustainable.
Followed:Principal CIT v. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. in ITA 475/2019 order dt. 2-8-2019(Del.- HC) CIT and ITO v. SSA'S Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 Taxman.com 241 (Kar): 2018 TaxPub(DT) 0953 (Karn-HC) CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2014) 359ITR 565 (Karn): 2014 TaxPub(DT) 0202 (Karn-HC)
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. :
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|