2026 (3) TMI 621

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....619164(1) dated 14.08.2025, arising out of penalty order passed by the Ld.AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), pertaining to the assessment year 2015-16. 2. In the above cited assessee's appeal, the appellant company is aggrieved, because the penalty levied by Ld.AO was confirmed by Ld.CIT(A). 3. From the appeal order of Ld.CIT(A) on penalty, it is observed that additions made by Ld.AO in assessment order were confirmed as under : "3.1. Aggrieved by the assessment order u/s. 143(3) dated 18.12.2017, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), Visakhapatnam on the following grounds : (i) Sale of scrap amounting to Rs. 3,49,99,784/- (ii) Sale of empties amounting to Rs. 8,65,345/- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncome voluntarily, and, but for the scrutiny, the above cited incomes would not have been brought to tax net. Since there is leakage of Revenue to national exchequer, the Ld.CIT(A) held that the appellant company had concealed the particulars of income and also furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Hence, the penalty levied by the Ld.AO was confirmed. 5. Aggrieved by the above order of Ld.CIT(A), the present appeal is filed by appellant company with the sole ground stating that the order of Ld.CIT(A) is not justified. Subsequently, the appellant company filed an additional ground, stating that the notice issued by the Revenue is ambiguous, hence not valid, because the relevant limb for which penalty was proposed to be levied, i.e. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be pressed into service to levy penalty. The operative portion of the same is reproduced : Reliance placed by the revenue upon MAK DATA PRIVATE LIMITED V/S. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II (2014) 1 SCC 674 = 358 ITR 593, is of no assistance as the Supreme Court merely observed therein that the Assessing Officer is not required to record his satisfaction in a particular manner while imposing the penalty or reduce it to writing. That is not the controversy in the case on hand. On principle, when penalty proceedings are sought to be initiated by the revenue under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961, the specific ground which forms the foundation therefor has to be spelt out in clear terms. Otherwise, an assessee would not have proper ....