2021 (11) TMI 135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Per Shri P. M. Jagtap , Vice President This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata dated 21.06.2017, whereby he confirmed the penalty of Rs. 3,43,310/- imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee in the present case is a Company, which is engaged in dealing in job....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the said penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer vide his appellate order dated 21.06.2017. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. At the time of hearing before us, the ld. Counsel for the as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oncealed particulars of such income" was not struck off by the Assessing Officer. It is observed that the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Suvaprasanna Bhattacharya -vs.- ACIT (in ITA No. 1303/KOL/2010) had an occasion to consider a similar issue in the identical fact situation and the order passed by the Assessing Officer imposing penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held to be inv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nal cancelling the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) was upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court holding that the notice issued under section 271(1)(c) without specifying which of the two contraventions, the assessee is guilty of was defective and the penalty imposed in pursuance of such defective notice was not sustainable. To arrive at this conclusion, Hon'ble Calcutta High....