TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... account of concealment or inaccurate particulars of income in the Penalty order 2. That, the Ed CITA) has wrongly confirmed levy of penalty of Rs. 5,68,529/- us 271(1)(c)) of the LT Act. 1961 3. That the findings of the Id assessing officer are not justified and are bad-in-law The assessee craves to add amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeals 3. Succinctly, the factual panorama of the case is that assessee before me, is an Individual. The assessee derived income from pension from Kandla Port Trust The assessee's case was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act. In response to the notice, the assessee has filed his revised return of income declaring total income of Rs. 42,68,430/-, thereafter, order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act completed on 21.12.2018 and determined taxable income of Rs. 92,77,720/- The said order was completed by the then assessing officer, a valuation report of AVO will be finalized, the actual 1. TCG payable. The said valuation report have on 30/05/2019. While finalizing the order, the assessing officer also had initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c) of the Act, read with explanation-1, the assessing officer is required to come to the conclusion that explanation furnished by the assessee was false or such person is not able to substantiate and fails to prove that such explanation was bona fide and that all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income have not been disclosed by the assessee. Therefore, it has been never found that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or concealed any income. The Id. Counsel further stated that the penalty notice issued u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, specifies that penalty proceeding has been initiated on account of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The copy of the penalty notice is enclosed at page no. 10-11 of the paper book. However, the penalty order u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, on perusal of the said order, it is clearly evident that the assessing officer has not strike out, as to whether the penalty is sought to be levied on the "furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealing particulars of income." Thus, the notice and order of the penalty differs in specifying the limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cient requirement under the Act. Just to forget to tick a particular limb in the penalty order, does not vitiate the penalty proceedings. The intention to initiate the penalty proceedings by the assessing officer should be taken into account. 9. I have heard the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length. I note that in the Penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961, the Assessing Officer, has observed as follows: "In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and as per the discussion above if is established that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income as well as concealed particulars of income, therefore, it is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1(c) of the Act. Therefore. I find that in penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961, the Assessing Officer, has initiated penalty on both limbs, that is, "furnished inaccurate particulars of income as well as concealed particulars of income" 10. However, in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer, vide order dated 21/12/2018, passed u/s 148 read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. initiated the penalty as follows: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... defective notice award of penalty can never be sustained 5 We have carefully examined the record as well as duly considered the rival contentions Both the Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the II AT have categorically held that in the present case, there is no record of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer that there was any concealment of income or that any inaccurate particulars were furnished by the assessee This being a sine qua non for initiation of penalty proceedings in the absence of such petition, the two authorities have quite correctly ordered the dropping of penalty proceedings against the petitioner 6. Besides, we note that the Division Bench of this Court in Samson Preinchery (supra) as well as in New Era Sova Mine (supra) has held that the notice which is issued to the indicate whether the Assessing Officer is satisfied that the case of the assessee involves concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or both with clarity If the notice is issued in the printed form, then, the necessary portions which are not applicable are required to be struck off so as to indicate with clarity the nature of the satisfac....