TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 295
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... after issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') dated 18/07/2011. By filing a letter, assessee sought time for filing return of income. Subsequently, a notice under section 142(1) dated 02/11/2011 was issued by the Assessing Officer. To this also, assessee sought time on the ground that his senior accountant was unwell. Thereafter, summons under section 131, dated 11/03/2011 & 21/03/2013 were issued. The assessee has not appeared before the Assessing Officer on the pretext of one reason or the other. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment and initiated penalty proceedings by issuing a notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. On appeal be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd held that 'where the tribunal is only required to consider a question of law arising from the facts which are on record in the assessment proceedings we fail to see why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee'. From the above, it is very clear that there is no fresh investigation on facts is required, the additional ground raised by the assessee has to be adjudicated, hence, the same has to be admitted by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd., (supra), the additional ground raised by the assessee is admitted. 9. Now coming to the validity of the notice ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income." 13 From the above, it is not clear whether Assessing Officer has initiated penalty proceedings for concealment of particulars of income or for furnished inaccurate particulars. Therefore, the notice issued by the Assessing Officer is a vague notice and is liable to be quashed in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Smt. Baisetty Revathi (supra) and also the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SSA's Emerald Meadows (supra). The coordinate bench of the Visakhapatnam tribunal in the case of Konchada Sreeram Vs. ITO in ITA No. 388/VIZ/2015, by order dated 06/10/2017 has consid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court cited, for starting the penalty proceedings, the condition precedent is that the assessing officer must be satisfied that a person has either concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. The person who is accused of the conditions mentioned in Section 271 should be made aware of the grounds on which imposition of penalty is proposed as he has a right to contest such proceedings and should have the full opportunity to meet the case of the revenue so as to show that the conditions stipulated in Section 271(1)(c) do not exist and that he is not liable to pay the penalty. The Hon'ble High ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... initiated separately. Neither in the assessment order nor in the penalty notice, the assessing officer has put the assessee on notice for which offence, the penalty u/s 271 was initiated. Therefore, the case is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of cited (supra) wherein the Hon'ble high court held as under: "On principle, when penalty proceedings are sought to be initiated by the revenue under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961, the specific ground which forms the foundation therefore has to be spelt out in clear terms Otherwise, on assesee would not have proper opportunity to put forth his defence. When the proceedings are penal in nature resulting in imposition of penalty ranging from 100....