2024 (7) TMI 1333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Assessment year [A.Y.] 2014-15, wherein the penalty of Rs. 1,52,084/- has been imposed upon the appellant assessee vide order dated 27.09.2022 passed by assessing officer u/s. 271(1)(C) of the Act. 2. The brief facts related to the appeal state that the appellant is a non resident Indian, settled in Dubai, UAE since the year 1978. During the assessment year A.Y.2014-15, the only source of appellant's income was interest on investments. Appellant did not file her return of income for A.Y.2014-15 as per the provisions of Section 139 of the Act. The Appellant's case was selected for scrutiny u/s. 147 of the Act. It was noted that the assessee had entered into t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r such circumstances is bad in law. b) It is well settled law that the penalty proceeding initiated without specifying the particular limb of the proceedings is bad in law. 3. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO wrongly issued the notice u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act though no proceedings have been initiated in the assessment order. The AO is required to initiate the penalty proceedings in the assessment order. b) The AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 271(1)(c) on 30/03/2022 i.e. after the assessment order passed on 03.03.2022. 4. a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed u/s. 147 is bad in law since order dated 03/03/2022 is digitally sig....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....09.2022 is unsustainable under law? 7. It transpires from the perusal of records that the appellant assessee is non-resident Indian and did not file the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15. It is only in response to the notice dated 30.03.2021 issued u/s. 148 of the Act, the assessee filed her return of income on 24.04.2021, declaring her total income at Rs. 60,83,333/-. The same was accepted by the Assessing Officer vide assessment order dated 03.03.2022 (digitally signed on 30.03.2022). It is noted that the assessment order does not even whisper with regard to any direction for initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(C) of the Act. 8. The statutory provisions under the Act, relevant to the case under consideration, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dition to tax, if any, payable by him, a sum of ten thousand rupees for each such failure. (iii) in the cases referred to in clause (c) [or clause (d)], [in addition to tax, if any, payable] by him, a sum which shall not be less than, but which shall not exceed [three times], the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of the concealment of particulars of his income [or fringe benefits] or the furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income for fringe benefits]. [*]]................................................................................." Section 271(1B) "[(1B) Where any amount is added or disallowed in computing the total income or loss of an assessee in any order of assessment or reasse....