2020 (4) TMI 616

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....M: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Pune dated 13.09.2017 for the assessment year 2009-10. 2. The effective ground raised by the assessee is as under :- "1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act which was so levied by the A.O. wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the total income of the assessee at Rs. 42,29,340/-. Further, the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceeding stating that "Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is being initiated separately by way of issuing of notice for concealment of income.". (para 3.1 of the assessment order). 4. In the penalty order, the Assessing Officer clearly stated that the levy of penalty i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....various binding judgments in the case CIT Vs. Shri Samson Perinchery (2017) 392 ITR 4 (Bom.) as well as the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565, Ld. Counsel demonstrated that the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer is unsustainable in law and the same is wrongly upheld by the CIT(A). 8. On the other hand, ld. DR f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... we find the following is the reasons for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act :- "6. .......... concealing the particulars of income by not declaring income of Rs. 2,12,919/-" 11. The above extracts reveal that the Assessing Officer suffers from ambiguity in his mind while recording the satisfaction at the time of initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 12. ....