2017 (3) TMI 1539

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r short hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The assessee has vehemently questioned the legality and correctness of the notice issued in this regard u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. It is the argument of the ld. AR that in the penalty order the Assessing Officer observed that "In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and as per the discussion above, it is established that the assessee has concealed particulars of income/furnished inaccurate particulars of income and this is, therefore a fit case for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act.". Ld. Counsel places reliance on several decisions including the decisions of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Jyoti Ltd., [2013] 34 taxmann.com 65 (Gujarat), CIT ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....359 ITR 565 (Kar). Vide paragraph 60, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has held as follows :- "60. Clause (c) deals with two specific offences, that is to say, concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. No doubt, the facts of some cases may attract both the offences and in some cases there may be overlapping of the two offences but in such cases the initiation of the penalty proceedings also must be for both the offences. But drawing up penalty proceedings for one offence and finding the assessee guilty of another offence or finding him guilty for either the one or the other 4 ITA No. 41/RJT/2015 Shri K.C. Varghese cannot be sustained in law. It is needless to point out satisfaction of the existence o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of CIT vs M/s. Maganur Builders in ITA No. 616/2015 dated 28.7.2016. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court considered this issue in the case of Jyoti Ltd. (supra), Whiteford India Ltd. (supra), New Sorathia Engg. Co. (supra) and Manu Engineering Works (supra). Finding of the Assessing Officer as extracted in Para 6 of Jyoti Ltd. (supra) is similar to the order in this case, and it is as follows :- "In view of the above facts, it is clear that the assessee concealed income/furnished inaccurate particulars of income. I, therefore, consider it a fit case for levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c)". 6. On a careful reading of the decisions relied upon by the assessee, it is, therefore, clear that drawing up penalty proceedings for one off....