Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2026 (7) TMI 1311

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'the Act') by the ACIT, Circle-55(1), New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the 'AO') pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. 2. Grounds of appeal filed by the Assessee are reproduced as under: "1. Because the action of imposing penalty of Rs. 12,91,499/- u/s 271(1)(c) is being challenged on facts & law and liable to be quashed. 2. Because the action for levying the Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is being challenged on facts & law since AO has not specified under which limb penalty is levied i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 3. Because the action is under challenge on fa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d i.e. whether for concealment of particulars income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. He has, therefore, argued that the penalty is liable to be deleted as the issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court. In particular, he has placed reliance on the following decisions: - (i) CIT & Anr. Vs. M/s SSA's Emerald Meadows in CC No. 11485/2016 dated 05.08.2016, wherein it was held that where the notice issued by the AO u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) did not specify under which limb of section 271(1)(c), the penalty proceedings had been initiated, the same was bad in law. (ii) CIT vs. Manjunath Cotton and Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 (SC) Whereby a notice without specify the limb under which penalt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....missioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in the course of any proceedings under this Act, is satisfied that any person- (a) ............. (b) ............. (c) has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income, or .................. Explanation 1.-Where in respect of any facts material to the computation of the total income of any person under this Act,- (A) such person fails to offer an explanation or offers an explanation which is found by the Assessing Officer or the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to be false, or ....