2022 (1) TMI 1271 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal quashes defective penalty notice, emphasizing clarity in legal notices.

The Tribunal quashed the impugned order and allowed the appeal of the assessee, finding the notice issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Income Tax ... Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non specification of charge - non striking off the limb - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the said notice reveals that the same has been issued in an omnibus performa without striking off the limb which is not relevant. In the present case the AO has initiated penalty proceedings for concealment of income. However, in the notice we observe both charges under section 271(1)(c) i.e. concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are mentioned. As in the case of Mohd.Farhan A. Shaikh [2021 (3) TMI 608 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has held that the notice issued without striking off irrelevant clause would make the notice ambiguous and hence, defective. Consequently, the entire penalty proceeds would be vitiated. Thus we hold that the notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Act is defective, hence, the subsequent penalty proceedings arising therefrom are vitiated. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:Validity of notice issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Analysis:The appeal was against the order confirming a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant argued that the notice issued by the Assessing Officer was defective as it contained both limbs of section 271(1)(c) without specifying the relevant limb for initiating the penalty. The appellant cited a High Court case where it was held that issuing a notice without striking off irrelevant matter would vitiate penalty proceedings. The Department defended the order. The Tribunal found the notice ambiguous as it contained both charges under section 271(1)(c) without specifying the relevant limb. Citing the High Court case, the Tribunal held that such a notice is defective and vitiates the penalty proceedings. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty proceedings must stand on their own and be informed through a statutory notice, resolving any ambiguity in favor of the assessee. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed the impugned order and allowed the appeal of the assessee.This judgment primarily dealt with the validity of a notice issued under section 274 r.w.s. 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal examined whether a notice containing both charges under section 271(1)(c) without specifying the relevant limb for initiating the penalty would vitiate the penalty proceedings. Citing a High Court case, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of a notice being clear and unambiguous, stating that penalty proceedings must stand on their own and be informed through a statutory notice. The Tribunal concluded that the notice in question was defective, leading to the vitiation of the subsequent penalty proceedings. The decision highlighted the need for strict construction of penal provisions and resolving any ambiguity in favor of the assessee.