TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 995
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t identical, thus both the appeals were heard together and are decided by common order to avoid the conflicting decision. First we shall take up appeal ITA No. 384/Mum/2014 for AY 2006-07. 2. Brief facts of the case are that return of income for relevant assessment year was completed on 30-12-2009 under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 153(A) of the Act. The AO while framing assessment made the addition of the Rs. 47,000/- holding that expenditure was incurred in cash, which is not reflected in the books of account. The AO treated the same as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C of the Act and initiated penalty. The AO issue noticed to the assessee under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1) (c) on 30-12-2009 (posted on 30th January 2010). The second notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DR for Revenue argued that the AO while framing assessment initiated penalty on both the charges and the same is clearly reflected in the order that assessee furnished inaccurate particular and concealed income. The Ld. DR further disputed the contention of Ld. AR of the assessee that the AO has not strike out the portion of notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)( c) about ticking the specific limb of charges. The Ld. DR drawn our attention that the AO has clearly mentioned that penalty is initiated for concealment of particulars of income. 4. We have considered the rival contention of the parties and gone through the orders of authority is below. From the records we have noticed that a survey proceeding u/s 133A were carried out in the business pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....008 on the group cases of assessee, certain material found and seized. After survey the assessee was served notice under section 153A (a) on 04.08.2008. In response to the notice the assessee filed its return of income on 17.01.2008. During the assessment the AO made addition of Rs. 47,000/- under section 69C. The addition was made by AO holding that the assessee has made expenses in cash and has not reflected this expenditure in its books of account. No explanation was offered by assessee for not reflecting such expenditure in books of accounts. Thus, it is a clear case of concealment of income. It was not a case that any legal claim of expanses was made and the same was disallowed during the assessment proceedings. The material was seized....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istrative device for informing the assessee about the proposal of levy of penalty in order to enable him to explain why it should not be levied against him. If it is taken for the sake of argument that mere mistake in the language in the notice for non-striking off of 'inaccurate particular' or marking on 'concealment of income' portion cannot by itself invalidate the notice. Entire facts and backgrounds thereof are to be kept in mind. Every concealment of fact may ultimately result in filing of or furnishing inaccurate particular. The decision of Bombay High Court in Kaushalya (supra) was brought in the notice of ld AR for assessee at the time of hearing of the submission. With utmost regard to the decision of Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs ....