TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (10) TMI 1279
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peals)] dated 16/10/2019 & 17/10/2019. 2. Since, the assessee has raised identical grounds in both the appeals which are having identical issues to be decided, both the appeals are clubbed and heard together. 3. The main contention of the counsel for the assessee is that the separate penalty proceedings have been initiated for the A.Y 2009-10 and 2010-11 by issuing a defective notices u/s 274 r.w.s 271(1)(c) of the Act, without mentioning the specific charge and without striking off the irrelevant portion of the notice. Further submitted that, consequent to the said defective notices, the orders u/s 271(1)(c) have been passed by imposing penalty, which has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has drawn ou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der of the penalty is sustainable which was initiated by issuing a defective notice without striking off irrelevant limb and without specifying the charge for which notice was issued?' has been decided by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (full bench at Goa) in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT [434 ITR (1)] and the Hon'ble High Court held as under:- "Question No. l: If the assessment order clearly records satisfaction for imposing penalty on one or the other, or both grounds mentioned in Section 271(l)(c), does a mere defect in the notice--not striking off the irrelevant matter--vitiate the penalty proceedings? 181. It does. The primary burden ties on the Revenue. In the assessment proceedings, it forms ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alty should be initiated. So, the assessee, stresses Kaushaiya, "fully knew in detail the exact charge of the Revenue against him". For Kaushaiya, the statutory notice suffered from neither non-application of mind nor any prejudice. According to it, "the so-called ambiguous wording in the notice [has not] impaired or prejudiced the right of the assessee to a reasonable opportunity of being heard". It went onto observe that for sustaining the piea of natural justice on the ground of absence of opportunity, "it has to be established that prejudice is caused to the concerned person by the procedure followed". Kaushalya doses the discussion by observing that the notice issuing "is an administrative device for informing the assessee about the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the assessee had concealed his income or he had furnished inaccurate particulars. 188. We may, in this context, respectfully observe that a contravention of a mandatory condition or requirement for a communication to be valid communication is fatal, with no further proof. That said, even if the notice contains no caveat that the inapplicable portion be deleted, it is in the interest of fairness and justice that the notice must be precise. It should give no room for ambiguity. Therefore, Dilip N. Shroff disapproves of the routine, ritualistic practice of issuing omnibus show-cause notices. That practice certainly betrays nonappiication of mind. And, therefore, the infraction of a mandatory procedure leading to penai consequence....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issuing notices in printed form without deleting or striking off the inapplicable parts of that generic notice. Conclusion: We have, thus, answered the reference as required by us; so we direct the Registry to place these two Tax Appeals before the Division Bench concerned for further adjudication." 8. As could be seen from the above, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Full Bench at Goa) in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT [(2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)] while dealing with the issue of non-strike off of the irrelevant part in the notice issued u/s.271(l)(c) of the Act, held that assessee must be informed of the grounds of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice and an omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vaguenes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e concealed the particulars of your income or furnished imaccurate particulars of such income n terms of explaination 1,2,3,4 and 5. You are requested to appear before me at 11:30 A.M./P.M. on 01.04.2013 and show cause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 27'1 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. If opportunity of being heard in person or you do not wish to aval yourself of this through authorised representative you may show cause in writting on or before the said date which wil be considered before any such order is made under section 271. section 27'1 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. If opportunity of being heard in person or you do not wish to aval yourself of this through authorise....