| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 4425 (Cal-HC) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 271(1)(c)
Where the notice issued under section 271(1)(c) did not specify which of the two contraventions had occurred, there existed technical defect in the notice and assessee was held to be guilty. Hence, the penalty imposed in pursuance of such defective notice was not sustainable.
|
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) - Concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - Non-specification of contraventions - Defective notice
Issue arose for consideration was whether the assessee was guilty when notice issued under section 271(1)(c) did not specify which of the two contraventions had occurred. Held: Where the notice issued under section 271(1)(c) did not specify which of the two contraventions had occurred, there exist technical defect in the notice and assessee was held to be guilty. Hence, the penalty imposed in pursuance of such defective notice was not sustainable.
REFERRED : Amrit Foods v. Commissioner of Central Excise (2005) 13 SCC 419 : 2005 (190) ELT 433 (SC) : 2005 TaxPub(EX) 2424,Pr. CIT-1 v. SRMB Srijan Ltd. [ITAT 8 of 2019 GA 188 of 2019 GA 189 of 2019, dt. 26-2-2019] : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 3009 (Cal-HC) and Pr. CIT v. Murari Mohan Koley [ITAT No.306 of 2017, GA No.2968 of 2017, dt. 18-7-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5631 (Cal-HC)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. :
IN THE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|