Tejpal Singh Nunia v. DCIT - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
Relied Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 2018 TaxPub(DT) 6831 (SC)
Followed CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1683 (SC)
Followed Union of India & Ors. v. Dharamendra Textile Processors & Ors. 2008 TaxPub(DT) 2320 (SC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax PublishersITA Nos. 1294, 1295 & 1296/JP/2019
2020 TaxPub(DT) 3981 (Jp-Trib)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 271(1)(c)

Where AO did not specify the grounds on which penalty was imposed. AO was required to specify that on which limb of section 271(1)(c), the penalty proceedings were initiated, i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, therefore, penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) was liable to be quashed.

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Defective show cause notice - Notice issued by AO without specifying grounds of penalty -

AO imposed penalty under section 271(1)(c) on assessee, who assailed the same contending that notice issued under section 274 did not specify the grounds on which penalty was imposed i.e. whether for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars. Held: AO while making the additions held that assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income. However, in the penalty order, AO levied the penalty for concealment of particulars of income. From perusal of show cause notice, it was very much obvious that AO did not specify the grounds on which penalty was imposed. AO was required to specify that on which limb of section 271(1)(c), the penalty proceedings were initiated, i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The notice in fact was in standard pro forma without the irrelevant clauses therein being struck off. Thus, penalty was deleted.

Followed:CIT v. Reliance Petro-Products Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 322 1TR 158 (SC) : 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1683 (SC) UOI & Ors. v. Dharmendra Textile Processors & Ors. (2008) 306 1TR 277 (SC) : 2008 TaxPub(DT) 2320 (SC) Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT & Anr. (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC) : 2007 TaxPub(DT) 1247 (SC) Sheveta Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [DB Income Tax Appeal No. 534/2008, dt. 6-12-2016] CIT v. SSA'S Emerald Meadows 2018 TaxPub(DT) 0953 (Karn-HC) CIT v. Jyoti Ltd. (2013) 34 taxmann.com 65 (Guj-HC) CIT & Ors. v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory & Ors. (2013) 359 ITR 565 (Kar-HC) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 0202 (Karn-HC) CIT v. Kaushalya & Ors. (1995) 216 ITR 660 (Born) : 1995 TaxPub(DT) 0109 (Bom-HC) Subhash Sharma v. Dy. CIT [ITA No.205/JP/2020 vide Order, dated 21-7-2020] ITO v. A. Shihabudeen (2020) 116 taxmann.com 495 (Coc) Rajendra Kumar Khandelwal v. D.C.I.T. [ITA No. 1094/JP/2019 vide Order, dated 3-1-2020] : 2020 TaxPub(DT) 0166 (Jp-Trib) Raj Kumar Sodhani v. D.C.I.T. [ITA No.424 to 426/JP/2016 vide Order, dated 15-7-2019] NN Jewellers v. I.T.O. [ITA No.63 to 68/JP/2019 vide Order, dated 26-3-2019] : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 2343 (Jp-Trib) Ratan Kumar Sharma v. I.T.O. [ITA No.176/JP/2018 vide Order, dated 8-3-2019] Neha Sharma v. I.T.O. [ITA No.781/JP/2017 vide Order, dated 8-3-2019] Prathvi Pal Dhabhai v. ITO [ITA No.789/JP/2015 vide Order, dated 7-8-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5220 (Jp-Trib) Lal Chand Mittal v. DCIT [ITA No.772/JP/2016 vide Order, dated 29-12-2011]Relied:Murarilal Mittal v. DCIT [ITA No.334/JP/2015 vide Order, dated 9-11-2016] Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 99 taxmann.com 152 (SC) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 6831 (SC)