Appeal allowed due to ambiguity in penalty charge specification.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, pronouncing the order on 11th March, 2022. The penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-Tax Act for the assessment year 2009-10 was deemed invalid due to ambiguity in specifying the charge for imposing the penalty, as observed by the Tribunal. The penalty was consequently deleted.

---

---

Issues involved:
Appeal against penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2009-10.

Analysis:
The appellant, a resident company, filed its return of income for the assessment year declaring a loss which was subsequently revised twice. The Assessing Officer disallowed certain expenses claimed by the appellant and made additional additions to the income. Penalty proceedings were initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act based on the disallowances and additions made. The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty which was upheld by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant contended that the penalty order was invalid as the specific charge for imposing the penalty was not mentioned in the show-cause notice. The appellant argued that there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The Departmental Representative, however, argued that the Assessing Officer had clearly recorded the satisfaction for imposing the penalty. The Tribunal observed that the Assessing Officer's satisfaction and the charge for imposing the penalty were not clearly specified, leading to ambiguity. Citing legal precedents, the Tribunal held that the penalty order was not valid and proceeded to delete the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal, pronouncing the order on 11th March, 2022.

---