T.V. TODAY NETWORK LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, DELHI

ITA 554/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the failure of the Assessing Officer to strike off the irrelevant portion of the penalty notice, thereby not specifically mentioning the offence committed by the assessee, is fatal to the penalty proceedings. This is based on the precedent set by the Bombay High Court in Mohd. Farhan A Shaikh vs DCIT and the Jurisdictional High Court in PCIT vs Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the CIT(A) confirming an assessment order. A preliminary issue was raised by the assessee regarding the penalty notice issued by the AO, which allegedly did not strike off the inappropriate portion regarding concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty notice under Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to strike off the irrelevant portion, thus not specifying whether the penalty is for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 274,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(6)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal, Adv
For Respondent: Ms Pooja Swaroop, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 14/05/2025Pronounced: 14/05/2025

PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.:

1.

The appeal in ITA No.554/Del/2025 for AY 2011-12, arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „ld. CIT(A)‟, in short] in Appeal No. 221/16/17(51/14-15) dated 28.02.2017 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) dated 25.03.2014 by the Assessing Officer, DCIT, Circle-16 (1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟).

2.

The assessee vide Ground No. 2.2 had raised a ground stating that the ld. AO in the penalty notice had not struck off the inappropriate portion as to whether the assessee had concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income. We

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 274

All 4,894 judgments and leading authorities on Section 274 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →