2019 (10) TMI 471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT-3(1), Indore. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal; 1.That, the learned CIT(A) erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the Order of Penalty passed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 by the AO imposing penalty of Rs. 1 ,00,000/-. 2.That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred in not considering the material fact that in the instant case, the AO imposed the penalty without first issuing a proper and valid show-cause notice to the appellant. 3(a) That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the order of penalty passed u/s. 271 (1 )( c) of the Act, without considering the material fact that the appellant had neither concealed nor furnished inaccurate particulars of her income f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ering the settled position of the law that penalty under s.271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be imposed for a mere wrong claim of the appellant in the return of income as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd. (2010) 36 DTR (SC) 449. 7.That, the appellant further craves leave to add, alter and/or amend any of the foregoing grounds of appeal as and when considered necessary. 3. Briefly stated facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is an individual and derives income from salary and business from trading in NCDX/MCS transactions under a proprietary concern M/s. Pragnesh Neema.. The assessee had furnished original return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 28.07.2008 declar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee, as to whether penalty is to be levied for 'furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealing the particulars of income'. Placing reliance on the judgments mentioned in the written submission which mainly includes judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs Kulwant Singh Bhatia ITA No.9 of 2018 dated 9.5.2018, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the Ld.A.O has failed in comply the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act by initiating the penalty proceedings with no specific charge. Reliance was also placed on Indore Tribunal decision in the case of Varad Mehta ITA No.693/Ind/16 dated 06.12.2018. 7. Per contra Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the orders....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nbsp;            Date: 06.01.2016 PAN ABZPN8695E To Shri Pragnesh Neema, 61/L. Keshar Bagh Road, Lal Buag, Indore Sub: Penalty fixation u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y. 2008-09 - reg. Please refer to the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y. 2008-09 in the above mentioned case, you are requested to appear before the undersigned 18.01.2016 at 11.45 A.M in my office at Room No.306, Aaykar Bhawan Annexe, Opp. White Church, Indore personally or through authorized representative to show cause as to why penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 be not levied against you. If you do not want to appear personally, you ....