Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC”: DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI
This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-15, New Delhi, Dated 09.10.2018, for the A.Y. 2013-2014, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.
I have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the findings of the authorities below.
The assessee filed the written statement stating therein that notice under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act as 2 ITA.No.8020/Del./2018 Smt. Krishna Devi (Individual), New Delhi. enclosed Dated 26.08.2016 did not specify the exact charge of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of such income. In these circumstances, notice is vague and liable to be set aside. The assessee relied upon the Order of ITAT, Delhi C-Bench in the case of Bharat Immunological and Biological Corporation Ltd., vs. DCIT [2019] 72 ITR (Trib.) (S.N.) 5 (Delhi). Copy of the Order is filed.
On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and submitted that failure of the A.O. to strike-off column in show cause notice is no ground for deleting the penalty. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the Order of ITAT, Chennai Bench reported in TS-289-ITAT- 2019-CHNY.
I have considered the rival submissions. The A.O. issued show cause notice before levy of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, Dated 26.08.2016 in which the A.O. has mentioned as under :
3 ITA.No.8020/Del./2018 Smt. Krishna Devi (Individual), New Delhi. “Have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income in terms of Explanation 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5.”
5.1. These facts, therefore, clearly show that notice issued by the A.O. for levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act to be bad in law as it did not specify in which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The entire penalty proceedings are, therefore, vitiated and no penalty is leviable. On this score itself, similar view is taken by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. SSAs Emerald Meadows 73 taxmann.com 241 and this decision is confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 73 taxmann.com 248. Further, the ITAT, Delhi Benches are taking a consistent view that in such circumstances, levy of penalty is invalid. Since the show cause notice is invalid due to the above reason and as such the entire penalty proceedings are vitiated. Thus, no penalty is leviable against the assessee. The decisions relied upon
4 ITA.No.8020/Del./2018 Smt. Krishna Devi (Individual), New Delhi. by the Ld. D.R. would not support the case of the Revenue, In view of the above, I set aside the Orders of the authorities below and cancel the penalty.
In the result, appeal of assessee allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court.