2023 (12) TMI 714

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unal"]. 3. The Tribunal, via the impugned order, had set aside the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, "CIT(A)"] and directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to delete the penalty amounting to Rs. 7,99,90,570/-. 4. The reason given by the Tribunal in setting aside the order of the CIT(A) was that the AO, while initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, should have alluded to the limb under which penalty is proposed to be levied. 4.1 In other words, the AO should have stipulated as to whether the penalty was proposed to be imposed on the respondent/assessee for concealment of particulars of its income, or furnishing inaccurate particulars. 4.2 Both limbs find mention in Section 271(1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs Bhudeva Estate Pvt. Ltd., 2023:DHC:5689-DB. (vi) Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Delhi vs Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation, 2023:DHC:5691-DB. (vii) Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi (Central)-3 vs Shyam Sunder Jindal, 2023:DHC:6138-DB. (viii) Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-6 vs Modi Rubber Ltd., 2023:DHC:7856-DB. 7. We may, for convenience, quote from one of the judgments i.e., Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd., which in our opinion, provides the rationale as to why it is necessary to indicate to the assessee the specific limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act under which penalty proceedings are triggered against him: "15. According to the Tribunal, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cancellation even when it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the assessee had concealed income in the facts and circumstances of the case? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in. holding that the penalty notice under Section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) is bad in law and. invalid inspite the amendment of Section 271(1B) 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 with....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mpany Ltd. (2021) 432 ITR 84 (Del.). 19. We may note, that even the assessment order dated 14.03.2015, whereby penalty proceedings were triggered, did not indicate as to which limb of Section 271(1)(c) was being triggered qua the petitioner. This is evident from the following observation made by the AO: "Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated separately for concealment of income & for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income." 20. We may note, that another coordinate bench of this Court, of which one of us [i.e., Rajiv Shakdher, J.] was a party has reached the same conclusion in PCIT vs. Minu Bakshi 2022 (7) TMI 1307-Delhi. 21. Penalty proceedings entail civil consequences for the assessee....