TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 437
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e same being without jurisdiction and barred by limitation, as provided under Section 275(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the ground that the first notice was issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax on 20.12.2016 and thus, the second notice (dt.22.9.2017), was issued under Section 274 read with Section 271-D of the Income Tax Act, after a period of six months from the date of initiation of proceeding, is barred by time. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner is an assessee of the respondent - department and a search was conducted by the Income Tax Authority under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, in the residential premises of the petitioner and after conclusion of search notice under Section 153A of the Income ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tal income in the assessment year as per the issue. The issues on which you are show caused as mentioned hereunder :- 1. On the basis of seized documents and in totality of the facts Tally account in Lenovo Laptop having "XYZ 0809 2", seized during the course of search and on the strength of show cause issued in case of PATH, it is clear that during A.Y. 2009-10 cash loan received by you is Rs. 31,49,500/- from PATH show cause as to why penalty u/s 269SS shall not be attracted on this issue. Also during A.Y. 2009-10 cash loan repaid by you to PATH is Rs. 15,75,700/- show cause as to why penalty u/s 269T shall not be attracted on this issue. Further it is clear that during A.Y. 2010-11 cash loan received by you is Rs. 29,94,800/- from PATH....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct. The Assessment Officer has only show cause the petitioner under Section 269-SS and 269-T to examine the violation of the above mentioned provisions of the Income Tax Act. 6. From the pleadings made in the writ petition, it is also an admitted fact that the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax was not competent authority in initiation of penalty proceeding under Section 271-D and 271-E of the Income Tax Act. The first notice under Section 271-D / 271-E read with Section 274 of the Income Tax Act have been issued by the Joint Director of Commissioner of Income Tax on 22.9.2017. Thus, the penalty proceedings under Section 271-D and 271-E have been initiated w.e.f. 22.9.2017. 7. Section 275(1) (C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides that pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come Tax Act. 8. It is only Joint Commissioner of Income Tax who is empowered to initiate as well as impose the penalty under Section 271-D or 271-E of the Income Tax Act. Thus, the limitation period of six months to be reckoned from the end of month of initiation of the penalty proceeding by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax and not from the date of assessment order. 9. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the contents of notice dated 20.12.2016, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax during the assessment proceedings and Section 274, 269-SS, 269-T, 271- D, 274-E and 275 of the Income Tax Act and submitted that the limitation for initiation of penalty proceeding for imposition of penalty under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rice Mills Ambala City, 2015 (64) taxmann.com 75 (SC) and submitted that under Section 275(1)(C), the starting point would be "initiation of penalty proceedings". In the case of CIT, Central - III V/s. Narayani & Sons (P) Ltd (supra) the assessment was completed on 26.12.2006 under Section 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act. After passing of assessment order on the same date, ie., 26.12.2016 itself, the Assessing Officer issued a notice for imposition of penalty under Section 271(D)(1), of the Income Tax Act. The Division Bench of Calcutta High Court relied on the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Jitendra Singh Rathore, (supra) has held that the Assessing Officer issued a notice dated 26.12.200....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evy of penalty in contravention of Section 269-SS and 269-T, as per sub- section(2) to both these sections in penalty imposition under sub-section (1) of these provisions shall be imposed by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. From the statutory provision, it is clear that the competent authority to levy the penalty is Joint Commissioner, therefore, only the Joint Commissioner can initiate proceeding for levy of penalty. 12. Insofar as the judgment of the Apex Court in D.M.Manasvi V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat II, [1972] 86 ITR 557 is concerned, that was a case, where penalty was levied under Section 271(1)(C) and as is evident from the provision itself, the proceedings under that Section are to be initiated on the basis of th....