INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 271AAB

Penalty under section 271AAB - Validity - No specific charge stated in notice issued under section 271AAB -

Assessee contended that order passed under section 271AAB was bad in law as there was no specific charge in notice issued under section 271AAB, specifying as to whether penalty proceeding was initiated under section 271AAB(1)(a) or 271AAB(1)(b) or 271AAB(1)(c). Held: Since assessee offered undisclosed income in return of income and no addition was made by the AO on that account, therefore, AO was not under any obligation to explain and make assessee known about nature of charge of default committed by assessee. Once assessee herself disclosed undisclosed income based on assets being unexplained cash and investment in gold jewellery found during the course of search, then it was very well in knowledge of assessee about undisclosed income and default committed by assessee. Thus, there was no merit or substance in contention of assessee.

Followed:The CIT & Oths. v. M/s. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory & Oths., M/s. V.S. Lad & Sons, (2014) 359 ITR 565 (Kar) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 0202 (Karn-HC); Shri Padam Chand Pungliya v. The Asstt. CIT (ITA No. 112/JP/2018, dated 5-4-2019) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 2207 (Jp-Trib); Shri Rajendra Kumar Gupta v. The DCIT (ITA No. 359/JP/2017) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 3753 (Jp-Trib); Shri Anuj Mathur v. The Dy. CIT [ITA No. 971/JP/2017, dt. 13-6-2018]

REFERRED : The CIT & Oths. v. M/s. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory & Oths., M/s. V.S. Lad & Sons, (2014) 359 ITR 565 (Kar) : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 0202 (Karn-HC) Shri Padam Chand Pungliya v. The Asstt. CIT (ITA No. 112/JP/2018, dated 5-4-2019) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 2207 (Jp-Trib) Shri Rajendra Kumar Gupta v. The DCIT (ITA No. 359/JP/2017) : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 3753 (Jp-Trib) Shri Anuj Mathur v. The Dy. CIT [ITA No. 971/JP/2017, dt. 13-6-2018]

FAVOUR : Against the assessee

A.Y. :

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT