|
The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 2857 (Mad-HC) : (2020) 427 ITR 0126 : (2020) 273 TAXMAN 0017 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
When Tribunal held that the penalty could not be levied under section 271AAA, it was automatic that the levy of penalty made under section 271(1)(c) was confirmed, since assessee had not challenged the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) and if assessee was aggrieved, she should have challenged that portion of the order of the Tribunal, therefore, assessee should be liable to penalty.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - CIT(A) held that provision of section 271AAA would apply - Assessee had no t challenged the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) -
A search and seizure operation were conducted at residential premises of assessee and her family members were subjected to search and seizure operations resulting in the assessment of valuables and books of accounts. After considering the submissions made by assessee, assessment was completed under section 153A read with section 143(3). AO mentioned that penalty proceedings would be initiated and accordingly issued the notice proposing to levy penalty under section 271(1)(c). CIT(A) held that provisions of section 271AAA would apply. Tribunal further dismissed the appeal of assessee by sustaining penalty under section 271(1)(c). Held: Tribunal rightly observed that when Tribunal held that penalty could not be levied under section 271AAA, it was automatic that the levy of penalty made under section 271(1)(c) was confirmed. Tribunal further observed that assessee had not challenged the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c). If assessee was aggrieved, she should have challenged that portion of the order of Tribunal, which held that assessee should be liable to penalty. Therefore, penalty imposed on assessee could not be deleted.
REFERRED : Smt. R. Mahalakshmi v. ACIT 2019 TaxPub(DT) 6459 (Chen-Trib) Smt R. Mahalakshmi v. Dy. CIT [I.T.A. No. 2784/Chny/2017, dt. 8-2-2018] R. Rangarajan v. Asstt. CIT [I.T.A. No. 985, 986, 1304, 1305/Mds/2013 / Assessment Year : 2008-09, dt. 25-11-2016] Asstt. CIT v. Smt. J. Mythili [I.T.A. Nos. 235 & 236/Mds/2013, dt. 30-4-2013]
FAVOUR : Against the assessee
A.Y. : 2008-09
SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT |