M/S. D.N. ASSOCIATES,LUCKNOW vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-V, LUCKNOW

ITA 2/LKW/2019Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 October 2019AY 2014-156 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that a show cause notice for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) must be specific about the limb of the charge being invoked. Since the notice was not specific, it was void ab initio, making the consequent penalty illegal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that the show cause notice for the penalty was not specific regarding the charge, i.e., concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is valid if the show cause notice does not specify whether it is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 274

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI A.D JAIN & SHRI T.S. KAPOOR

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Sinha, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Jai Nath Verma, DR
Hearing: 23/10/2019Pronounced: 25/10/2019

PER: A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT:

This is assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-II, Lucknow dated 22.10.2018, taking the following grounds:

“1. The Ld. CIT(A)-II, Lucknow erred while sustaining the penalty order of Assessing Officer imposing penalty of Rs.1,19,000.00. 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-II, Lucknow failed to adjudicate the ground that the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty on both the limbs “concealment of particulars of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.”

2 2 The grievance of the assessee is against imposition of penalty

under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, which has been confirmed by the learned CIT(A).

3.

At the time of hearing before us, the ld. A.R. of

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 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →