TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 987
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re is a delay in filing of the appeal. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay along with affidavit. Considering the facts and the reasons envisaged by the Ld.AR, we find the delay is reasonable and the Ld. DR has no serious objections. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted and heard. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a non resident foreign company registered in Mauritius. The assessee is a tax resident of Mauritius and does not have any permanent establishment in India. The assessee company has filed the return of income on 17.11.2014 for the A.Y 2014-15 with a total income of Rs. 18,40,23,670/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) and 14....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....17. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A). The assessee made submissions on the merits and validity of issue of penalty notice. Whereas the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the order of A.O. levying penalty and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the Ld.CIT(A) order, the assessee filed an appeal with the Tribunal. 3. At the time of Hearing, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in not considering the facts that the Notice u/sec 274 r.w.s.271 of the Act issued by the Assessing Officer does not specify, whether the penalty is levied for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Ld.AR supported his submissions with paper book and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the case? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is bad in law and invalid despite the amendment of Section 27.41 13) with retrospective effect and bra virtue of the amendment, the assessing officer has initiated the penalty by properly recording the satisfaction for the same? (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deciding the appeals against the Revenue on the basis of notice issued under Section 274 without taking into consideration the assessment order when the assessing officer has specified that the assessee has concealed particulars of income? ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 observed that the levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb under which it is being levied. As per the Hon'ble High Court, where the AO proposes to invoke the first limb being the concealment then, notice has to be appropriately marked. Further, the Hon'ble High Court has held that the standard proforma of notice u/s 274 of the Act, without striking of the relevant clauses would lead to inference of non-application of mind by the AO. In the present case, the learned Authorised Representative demonstrated the notice, we find that the AO is not sure whether he was to proceed on the basis that the assessee has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. The Hon'....