2021 (9) TMI 397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ar Reddy ORDER Per R. S. Syal, VP These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders passed by the CIT(A)-6, Pune on 30-12-2016 confirming the penalty of Rs. 3.20 crore imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called 'the Act') in relation to the assessment year 2004-05. ITA No. 474/PUN/2017: 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....#39;. In such a situation, there is no need to strike off any of the two. 4. Before testing the contention of the assessee under law, it is significant to find out the details of additions/disallowance culminating into penalty for determining, if these fall under any one or both of the limbs. On perusal of the penalty order, it can be seen that the penalty has been imposed with reference to dis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... itself, the AO again observed "that the penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act 1961 vide notice dated 26/12/2006 was separately initiated for concealment of income and filing inaccurate particulars of income." The penalty order was eventually passed by noticing that "the assessee has committed the default within the meaning of section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, without any reaso....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....com 248 (Bom) also took similar view that where inapplicable portions were not struck off in the penalty notice, the penalty was vitiated. The SLP of the Department against this judgment has recently been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pr. CIT Vs. Golden Peace Hotels and Resorts (P.) Ltd. (2021) 124 taxmann.com 249 (SC). 7. In view of the overwhelming legal position, it is clear....