RAVI PRAKASH OJHA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT, C.C.-1, RANCHI

PER BENCH :- These four assessee’s appeal(s) for assessment year(s) 2011-12 to 2014-15 arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Patna-3’s separate orders all dated 24.12.2019 passed in case Nos.ITBA/ APL/S/ 250/2019-20/ 1023001748(1), 1023002190(1), 1023002767(1) & 1023003246(1); respectively involving penalty(ies) proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file(s) perused.

ITA No.01 04/Ran/2020 A.Ys. 11-12 to14-15 Sh. Ravi Prakash Ojha Vs. ACIT C.C-1, Ran Page 2 assessment year-wise; respectively. Learned counsel invited our attention to the corresponding penalty notice(es) all dated 28.12.2017 nowhere indicating as to whether the assessee had concealed particulars of his income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income. We find no merit in Revenue’s instant stands in view of the case laws (2009) 309 ITR 107 (Del) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Grinning Factory and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Rampur Engineering Co. Ltd. (2009) 309 ITR 143 (Del) & PCIT v/s. Dr. Murari Mohan Koley ITAT No. 306 of 2017 GA No. 2968 of 2017 dt. 18.7.2018 (Cal). Their lordships decide the issue in assessee’s favour that such a compliance has to come at the time of finalization of assessments proceedings as well. We thus reject the Revenue’s foregoing stand relying on both the lower authorities’ action imposing the impugned penalty(ies). Same are directed to be deleted therefore.