TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1087
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee against order dated 30/08/2017 passed by CIT(A)-Ghaziabad, for assessment year 2013-14. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- "1. That the penalty proceedings and also the penalty order are liable to be quashed because the "charge" had not been specified. 2. That on the facts of the case and under the law, the penalty u/s. 271(1) (c) which had been levied by the Id AO and which has bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....016 thereby making addition of Rs. 9,38,333/- in respect of difference found in calculation sheet of capital gain. Thus, his total income was assessed at Rs. 66,33,660/- penalty notice u/s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 1/7/2016. The penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed on 27/7/2016. Thereby imposing penalty of Rs. 1,93,296/-. 4. Being aggrieved by the penalty order, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Thus, the Ld. DR submitted that the notice is valid. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order, penalty order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused all the relevant material available on record. The penalty notice is on both the limbs but the penalty order is restricting itself to that of furnishing of inaccurate part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t comes into picture when there is a failure to furnish returns or there is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars before the Assessing Officer. But in the present case before the Assessing Officer, all the relevant facts were already available and the mistake has been rectified by the assessee prior to the mistake pointed out by the Assessing Officer to the assessee during ....