| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 5642 (Mum-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
AO had to fasten the liability on a specific charge and initiating the penalty under one charge and levying the penalty under different charge is impermissible in law, as these two terms carry different connotations and failure to specify the exact limb for which the assessee was being penalized, would be fatal to the penalty proceedings. Hence, penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) was deleted.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Leviability - Non-specification of exact limb for which the assessee was being penalized -
AO levied penalty under section 271(1)(c). Assessee contested said levy on legal grounds, by submitting that notice under section 274 was issued for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, whereas penalty has been levied for concealment of income under Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) which was impermissible in law since both the allegations carry different connotations. Held: In the instant case penalty was initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income but finally the penalty has been levied for concealment of income which is impermissible under law. Moreover, as settled in catena of binding judicial precedent, these two terms carry different meaning/connotations and failure to specify the exact limb for which the assessee was being penalized, would be fatal to the penalty proceedings. Hence, penalty levied by AO under section 271(1)(c) was deleted.
Relied:CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565 (Karn) : (2013) 218 Taxman 423 (Karn) : (2013) 35 Taxmann.com 250 (Karn) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 0202 (Karn-HC), CIT v. Samson Perinchery (ITA No. 1154 of 2014) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 0672 (Bom-HC)
REFERRED : Dilip N. Shroff v. Jt. CIT & Anr. (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC) : 2007 TaxPub(DT) 1247 (SC),T. Ashok Pai v. CIT (2007) 292 ITR 11 (SC) : 2007 TaxPub(DT) 1251 (SC),CIT and ITO, Bangalore v. SSA'S Emerald Meadows [I.T.A. N O . 380 OF 2015, dt. 23-11-2015] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 0953 (Karn-HC) ,New Sorathia Engineering Co. v. CIT (2006) 282 ITR 642 (Guj) : 2006 TaxPub(DT) 1265 (Guj-HC),Meherjee Cassinath Holdings Private Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [ITA No. 2555/MUM/2012, dt. 28-4-2017] : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 1239 (Mum-Trib),Mangalam Drugs & Organics Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (ITA No.5454/Mum/2011) : 2015 TaxPub(DT) 4418 (Mum-Trib), and CIT & Anr. v. SSA'S Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 Taxmann.com 248 (SC) : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 4242 (SC)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. : 2010-11
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|