Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)
Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Brajendra Kumar (DR) Date of Hearing: 30/12/2020 Date of Pronouncement: 30/12/2020 O R D E R
PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 08.04.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30 (for short ‘the CIT(A), Mumbai, for the assessment year 2009-10, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee against the penalty order passed u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’).
The assessee has challenged the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) on the following effective grounds:- 1. “The Penalty order dated 29.06.2017 passed u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act is bad in law since the proper satisfaction was neither recorded in the notice u/s 271 (1) (c) nor in the Assessment order. The Penalty was initiated on both the limbs i.e. for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and levied on concealment of particulars of income which is impermissible under the law. Thus, the notice u/s 271 (1) (c) Assessment Year: 2009-10 and subsequent penalty order are bad in law and the same may be quashed and set aside.
2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in upholding the concealment penalty levied by the Ld. A.O. u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act amounting to Rs. 2,38,961/- without appreciating that the Appellant has neither concealed any particulars of income nor furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. Thus, the levy of penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act is unjustified and the same may be deleted.”