2018 (6) TMI 1554

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) For the Respondent : Smt. Parwinder Kaur, CIT-DR ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is a set of four Appeals by two Assessees for two consecutive years, i.e., assessment years (AYs.) 2008-09 and 2009-10. The same raising common issues, were taken up for hearing by the Tribunal together, i.e., on 26/8/2015. However, a difference of opinion on the sustainability of the penalty u/s. 271(1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of difference of opinion between the two members: "Whether, in case where the satisfaction of the AO while initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is with regard to alleged concealment of income by the assessee, whereas the imposition of the penalty is for 'concealment/furnishing inaccurate particulars of income', the levy of penalty is not sustainable?....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hree Members and, therefore, of the majority view, in consonance with which the final order by the tribunal is to be passed, no objection thereto was fairly raised by the ld. CITDR during hearing. We accordingly hold that the penalty imposed in the manner afore-said is not sustainable in law. The impugned penalty is accordingly directed to be cancelled, allowing the assessee's Gd. 1.1. 3. The o....