TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 1524
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. We have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties and perused the material on record. 3. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that before levy of the penalty A.O. issued show cause notice Dated 28.12.2011 in all the above assessment years in which the A.O. has mentioned as under : "Have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income IN TERMS OF EXPLANATION 1,2,3,4 AND 5/Undisclosed Income in the case of search." 3.1. He has submitted that identical notices have been issued in the remaining appeals as well. He has, therefore, submitted that it is not discerning as to whether penalty proceedings were initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... : 11.10.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. : This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Gurgaon, Dated 14.06.2016, for the A.Y. 2012-2013. 2. We have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties. 3. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that prior to levy of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, A.O. issued show cause notice dated 02.03.2015 in which A.O. has mentioned as under : "Have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income." 3.1. He has further submitted that A.O. issued another show cause notice under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, Dated 14.08.2015 f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lty on identical facts. 4. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and submitted that this point have not been raised by assessee and essentially it is an issue of fact, therefore, this ground cannot be considered in favour of the assessee and relied upon Order of ITAT, Delhi G-Bench in the case of Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Meerut vs., DCIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad, Dated 09.08.2019 in ITA.Nos.5434 & 5435/Del./2016 for the A.Ys. 2008-2009 and 2009- 2010. 5. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. The contents of the notice issued before levy of the penalty are reproduced above which clearly show that A.O. has not mentioned as to for which limb of Section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. We have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties and perused the material on record. 3. The assessee in the present appeal has challenged the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act. The assessee also raised additional ground of appeal stating therein that levy of the penalty is unjustified because A.O. has not specified whether penalty have been levied for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Since it is a legal issue, therefore, same is admitted for disposal of the appeal. 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to show cause notice Dated 28.03.2013....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and relied upon Judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd., vs. CIT [2018] 93 taxmann.com 250 (Mad.) and Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd., vs. CIT [2018] 99 taxmann.com 152 (SC). 6. We have considered the rival submissions. In this case, the A.O. issued show cause notice for levy of penalty in which A.O. has mentioned both the limbs of section 271(1)(c) of the Act that assessee has concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. The issue of the notice is bad in law as it did not specify under which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, penalty proceedings have been init....