NAVNEET KR. KEDIA,PURNIA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNIA

PER BENCH:- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2006-07 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Bhagalpur’s order dated 31.10.2013 involving penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA No.349/Pat/2018 A.Y. 2006-07 Navneet Kumar Kedia Vs. ITO Wd-3(1) Purnia Page 2 imposing penalty ₹65,100/-. Learned counsel invited our attention to the corresponding penalty notice dated 31.10.2013 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) Madhushree Gupta vs. Union of India, (2013) 359 ITR 515 (Kar) 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. Same is directed to be deleted therefore.