2021 (7) TMI 804

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the assessee nor any adjournment application was filed. Further the present appeal being an old appeal filed in 2016 and considering the aforesaid facts, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee after considering the material on record and after hearing by the Learned DR. 3. Before us, at the outset, Learned DR submitted that the issue involved in all the three appeals are identical except for the year and amounts involved. In view of the aforesaid submission of Learned DR, we for the sake of convenience proceed to dispose of all the three appeals by a consolidated order but for the sake of reference refer to the facts for A.Y. 2010-11 in ITA No.6453/Del/2016. 4. The relevant facts as culled from the material on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....antum has been heard and time be given. 2. That the ld CIT(A) has erred in not following the principles of natural justice by not allowing the appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard when it was specifically requested. 3. That the Ld CIT(A) has erred in sustain the penalty of Rs. 3,57,34,853/- imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act without appreciating the facts of the case and detailed submissions made by the appellant. 4. That the ld CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating Ground Nos.2 & 3 raised before him. 5. That the order imposing penalty is bad in law and void ab initio since in the show cause notice issued u/s 274 read with section 271 the ld AO has not struck off the irrelevant clause of the notice, meaning thereby the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....culars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, he may direct such person shall pay by way of penalty, in addition to the tax payable by him, a sum which shall not be less than but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment of particulars of his income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income. Thus the two key expressions which comprises of two limbs for imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act are "concealment of particulars of his income" & "furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income". It is a settled law that while levying penalty for concealment, the AO has to record satisfaction and thereafter come to a finding in respect of one ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the notice has to be appropriately marked. If in a printed format of the notice the inapplicable portion is not struck off thus not indicating for which limb the penalty is proposed to be imposed, it would lead to an inference as to non application of mind, thus vitiating imposition of penalty. 10. We find that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (2021) 432 ITR 84 (Del), after considering the decision in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 (Kar) & CIT vs. SSA's Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 Taxman.com 241 (Kar) [where the SLP filed by Revneue was dismissed and reported in (2016) 386 ITR (ST) 13 (SC)] has held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not leviable w....