2017 (3) TMI 1540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he relevant year, income from house property. The assessee filed return of income on 14.11.2008 for the Assessment Year 2008-09 declaring a total income of Rs. 46,43,450/- whereas the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was completed on 22.10.2010 determining the total income at Rs. 53,43,450/-. Subsequently, the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated with the issuance of notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act and ended up with levy of penalty of Rs. 2,37,930/- by way of order dated 1.11.2013. Assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) by way of the impugned order confirmed the levy of penalty and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... such portion indicating the furnishing of inaccurate particulars was the charge proposed to be levied, was marked with ticks. Basing on this, he argued that when it is clearly and unambiguously stated in the assessment order as well as in the notice that the proceedings are initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, assessee cannot have the benefit of the judgments relied upon by him. He further submitted that in the penalty order, what is stated is concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and both the parameters fall in the same category, as such there was no charge for one limb and penalty for other limb. He prayed to dismiss the appeal. 5. We have carefully perused the mat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... called upon to meet. Otherwise though the initiation of penalty proceedings may be valid and legal, the final order imposing penalty would offend principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty must be determined with reference to the information, facts and materials in the hands of the authority imposing the penalty at the time the order was passed and further discovery of facts subsequent to the imposition of penalty cannot v....