2026 (3) TMI 1663

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Respondent : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR. ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune, hereinafter referred to as "(Ld.CIT(A)"], vide order dated 11.01.2019 pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15 and arises out of the penalty order dated 29-11-2023 passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....curate particulars of income" and the inapplicable portion has not been struck off. Similarly, the Assessing Officer while issuing the notice dated 28.12.2016 (page No. 1 of Paper Book) for penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act mentioned both the limbs viz. 'concealed the particulars of income and furnished inaccurate particulars of such income' and again the inapplicable portion has not b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lty imposed under section 271(1) (c ) of the Act which was accepted by the ITAT. It followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory [2013] 35 taxmann.com 250/218 Taxman 423/218 Taxman 423/359 ITR 564 and observed that the notice issued by the AO would bad in law if it did not specify which limb of section 271(1) (c ) the penalty proceedings had been ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat penalty proceedings are initiated under section 271(1)(c) for both the limbs i.e. concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and did not specify the limb under which limb the penalty in dispute is proposed/initiated. We further note that even the Assessing Officer while passing the penalty order dated 29.11.2023 vide para 9 has stated that "In the present circumst....