TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 883
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....71(1)(c) of the Act does not specify the nature of limb under which the assessee is covered. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) NFAC has erred in law and on facts in not holding that the notice initiating the penalty proceedings is vague and, hence, the penalty order is bad in law. 3. The learned CIT(A) NFAC has erred in law and on facts in upholding enhancing the rate of penalty from 100% to 200% without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 4. The Ld.CIT(A) NFAC has erred in law and on facts in upholding and enhancing the penalty to Rs. 25,57,600/- as against Rs. 12,78,800/- levied by the Assessing Officer. 5. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal." Revenue "1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A), has erred in deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, without considering the fact that neither the assessee society nor members have offered income received during the year amounting to Rs. 8,10,08,200/- being a compensation on sale of TDR/FSl of the Four Plots to Sandhu Builders for the Re-development, which was owned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ht therein. Therefore, the consideration received by the society members is arising as a result of transfer of capital assets by the assessee society .which need to be taxed in the hand of society itself?" 7. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A), has erred in deleting the penalty u/s 271 (1 )(c) of the Act, without considering fact that as per the rule of Co-operative society, any compensation / consideration received in respect of property belonging to the society and should go to the society account and it shall be used for the welfare of the society under the principle of mutuality, however in this case the society has allowed each members to receive their share of compensation for extinguishing the rights and interest in the society because if this amount is received by the society in its account shall amount to a profit which is not distributable among the members under the rule and thus the payment of compensation directly deposited through Escrow Account of the members was only a colorable device to avoid tax by the society?" 8. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ived on 02.04.2014. In the penalty notice, the AO has not specified the limb under which the penalty has to.be levied i.e. whether for the concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income. Under such circumstances, various courts have held that the penalty proceeding initiated by the AO is bad in law. This ground of appeal is admitted. In respect of this ground of appeal the Assessee made the following submissions:- "The Assessing Officer issued the notice under section 274 r.w.s 271(1)(c) dated 27.03.2014, received on 02.04.2014. In the penalty notice, the AO has not specified the limb under which the penalty has to be levied i.e. whether for the concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particular of such income. Under such circumstances, various courts have held that the penalty proceeding initiated by the AO is bad in law. So we request you to kindly set aside the order of penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)on the appellant. Please refer to the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Belagavi vs. M/s RyataraSahakariSakkareKarkhane (Decision of Karna....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w:- "179. Besides, the prima facie opinion in the assessment order need not always translate into actual penalty proceedings. These proceedings, in fact, commence with the statutory notice under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274. Again, whether this prima facie opinion is sufficient to inform the assessee about the precise charge for the penalty is a matter of inference and, thus, a matter of litigation and adjudication. The solution, again, is a tick mark; it avoids litigation arising out of uncertainty. 180. One course of action before us is curing a defect in the notice by referring to the assessment order, which may or may not contain reasons for the penalty proceedings. The other course of action is the prevention of defect in the notice-and that prevention takes just a tick mark. Prudence demands prevention is better than cure. Answers: Question No. 1: If the assessment order clearly records satisfaction for imposing penalty on one or the other, or both grounds mentioned in Section 271(1)(c), does a mere defect in the notice-not striking off the irrelevant matter-vitiate the penalty proceedings? 181. It does. The primary burd....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A No.4098/Mum/2023 is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th day of June, 2024. ============= Document 1 यम 1961271 274 के अधीन सूचना NOTICE UNDER SECTION 24 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 PAN: AAAAC 009 J To MS. CHETAK CO-OP IISG SOC. Marge Mata, 35 Pa Bandra, Mumbai-400050. जे Office of the Income-Tas Officer Room No.-307, Piramal Chamber, L Mumbai 400012 /Dated:27/03/2014 PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) के Whereas the course of proceedings before se for the Assessment Year 2006-07 ↑ YOU> ਇਸ ਮà©à¨£à¨¿ ਯਾ ਨ ਤੂ ਇਕ ਦੀ ਹੀ ਹੈ । ਤੇ ਸਾਰੀ ਮਲਕ ਇਕ ਅਧਿਕਾਰ, ੠॥ ੧੨:13, 17 (1) 14 के कई के 1383361 13923 The off है। दिठऔर 1111) *Have without reasonable use fled to amish me bare of income which you were ....