TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 960
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 15.03.2024 for the assessment year 2002-03. 2. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee read as under :- "1.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of additions on account of gift of Rs. 15,00,000/- and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....these issues having been already deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT vide order dated 19/12/2018, the second penalty order passed by the Assessing officer is illegal and not sustainable under law. 2.1 That even otherwise, the Assessing officer was not justified in imposing the penalty without recording requisite satisfaction and in absence of valid notice u/s 274 of the Act as to the nature of defau....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and it was prayed that since the notice is not specifying the charge, penalty levied is liable to be quashed. 6. Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the aforesaid issue was also raised before the ld. CIT (A) but he has rejected the same. 7. Upon careful consideration and going through the notice submitted by the assessee at page n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rounds of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice. An omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vagueness." 8. Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in ITA 475/2019 & Ors. Vide order dated 02.08.2019 has also taken the same view. Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court concluded as under :- "21. The Respondent had challenged the upholding of the penalty imposed under Section 271(1) (c) of the....