TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 1231
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in levying penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment years under consideration. 3. At the outset, ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to the notice issued by the AO u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, all dated 26.12.2017 for A.Y.2010-2011 to 2012-2013 & 2015-2016, copy of which are placed on record and pointed out therefrom that in the said notice, the Assessing Officer has stated as under: " *** have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, Penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) is hereby initiated." 4. He submitted that it is not clear from the said notice issued u/s.274/271(1)(c) of the Act by the Assessing Officer whe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that in the notice the AO took one of the limb i.e. concealment of particular of income. Therefore, the claim of the assessee is not acceptable and he also supported the judgments cited by the CIT(A) and also submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sundaram Finance Limited Vs. DCIT (2018) 259 TAXMAN 0220 (SC) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. He further submitted that Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is applicable in the present case. In this regard, ld. DR relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal, [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183 (SC). Accordingly, ld. DR submitted that the penalty imposed by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) deserves to be upheld for the both....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with retrospective effect and by 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? 3. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee holding the notice issued by the Assessing Officer under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') to be bad in law as it did not specif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o a well-accepted proposition that the aforesaid two limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act carry different meanings. Therefore, it was imperative for the Assessing Officer to strike- off the irrelevant limb so as to make the assessee aware as to what is the charge made against him so that he can respond accordingly. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory, 359 ITR 565 (Kar) observed that the levy of penalty has to be clear as to the limb under which it is being levied. As per Hon'ble High Court, where the Assessing Officer proposed to invoke first limb being concealment, then the notice has to be appropriately marked. The Hon'ble High Court held that the standard proforma of notice und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fective notice, cannot be held good, correct and sustainable as per the proposition of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 12. Further, the contention of the ld. DR that Section 292BB of the Act is applicable in the present case, is not acceptable because after careful reading of Section 292BB of the Act, we found that this section is applicable for issuance of notice, which is not in the present case. The assessee is not denying the issuance of notice and the assessee is objecting the particular limb regarding imposing of the penalty is not clear under which the AO wants to impose the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act. Therefore, the case law relied on by the ld. DR in the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Tribunal has dismissed the Appeal imposing penalty. Learned counsel for the appellant referring to the recording in the assessment order with the hand written contended that the Assessing Officer has initiated a proceeding only under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and notice came to be issued was in printed form wherein it has not been stated whether it was concealment of income or inaccurate income. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax and another versus 1. Manjunatha Cotton and ginning factory, 2. Manjunath Ginning and pressing, 3. Veerabhadrappa Sangappa and Co., 4. V.S. Lad and sons, 5. G.M. Exports as reported in [2013] 359 ....