TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (9) TMI 1006
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw as the Ld. A.O. has not mentioned specific charge in the Statutory Notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That the Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals)-I Kanpur has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the Penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even when the Ld. A.O has not mentioned the specific charge in the Statutory Notice issued u/s 274 r/w section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That the impugned Penalty Order passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is illegal and unsustainable in law as the Ld. A.O. has not recorded satisfaction in terms of Section 271(1)(c) read with section 271(1B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isallowance of expenses of Rs. 13,37,539/- debited by the appellant in Profit & Loss Account even when all particulars were furnished by appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 9. That the Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals)-I Kanpur has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the penalty levied by the A.O. is arbitrary, unwarranted, unjustified and unsustainable in law and on facts therefore, deserves to be deleted. 10. That the Order of the Ld. C.I.T.(Appeals)-I, Kanpur sustaining the impugned Penalty Order passed by the A.O. is contrary to the principles of natural justice and equity as it is passed in an exparte manner without even examining the assessment records. 11. That the Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals)-I Kanpur ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 6. From a perusal of this notice, it is crystal clear that the charge for which penalty is proposed to be levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, whether for concealment of income, or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, is not specific. The law mandates that the authority, who is proposing to impose penalty, shall be certain as to the basis on which the penalty is being levied and the notice must reflect that specific reason, so that the assessee, to whom such notice is given, can prepare himself regarding the defence, which he would like to take to support his case. This is even enshrined in the principles of natural justice and as has been upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court and other High Courts. 7. In 'CIT vs. SSA....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs of income. Sending printed form, where all the grounds mentioned would not satisfy the requirement of law. The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, the principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. Penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings, though it emanates from the assessment proceedings; still it is separate and independent proceedings all together. 9. In 'Meherjee Cassinath Holdings Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)', ITA No. 2555/MUM/2012, order dated 28/04/2017, the observation of the Bench was that penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act are "quasi-criminal" proceedings and ou....