2025 (10) TMI 534

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed to as "AY") 2010-11 & 2011-12 against the confirmation of penalty levied by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Both the parties agreed that the issues raised by the assessee are similar/identical and the decision of one appeal will decide the fate of the other. Therefore, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2010-11 taken as lead case and the result of which will follow for AY 2011-12. SP Nos.76 & 77/Chny/2025 are the Stay Petitions filed by the assessee for AYs 2010- 11 & 2011-12. 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee drew our attention to Ground No.3 for both the assessment years which are similarly worded and the same is read as under: 3. For that the Learned Comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ealed the particulars of his income" or "furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income", i.e. without striking down the fault which is inapplicable in the facts of the present case. In other words, while proposing levy of penalty, the AO has put to notice the assessee on both the faults without removing the inapplicable charge. Due to the omission, on the part of the AO, not striking down one of fault specified in the impugned notice, the assessee pleads his inability to properly defend the charge/fault, against which, the AO was proposing to levy penalty. In such factual background, the Tribunal is noted to have consistently held such notices to be bad in law for not specifying the specific fault for which the assessee was being proceed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We also find that Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. SSA's Emerald Meadows, reported in (2016) 73 taxmann.com 241 (Kar) endorsed the same view in Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) and held as under:- "3. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee holding the notice issued by the Assessing Officer under section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), to be bad in law as it did not specify which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal, while allo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uld be remembered that by maintaining procedural fairness protects the right of individuals and enhances public confidence in the process. 18. The legal maxims (i) audi alterm partem (the right to be heard) & (ii) memo judex in parte suo (no person shall be a judge in his own cause) are two legal principles which is the core of principles of natural justice. 19. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.S.Gill v. The Chief Election Commission reported in [1978] AIR 851 held as under: The dichotomy between administrative and quasi-judicial functions vis-à-vis the doctrine of natural justice is presumably obsolescent after A.K. Kraipak v. UoI reported in 1970 SC ISO which marks the water-shed in the applicat....