PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-1 vs. M/S. VERONICA COMMERCIAL (P) LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal rightly granted relief to the assessee because the show cause notice under Section 274 was defective. Such a defect is incurable as it affects the root of the matter.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against an ITAT order that had granted relief to the assessee. The ITAT had found the show cause notice issued under Section 274 of the Income Tax Act to be defective.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) are invalid if the show-cause notice does not specifically state the grounds for proposed penalty.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
OD-46
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE
ITA/31/2020 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-1 VS. M/S. VERONICA COMMERCE PVT. LTD.
BEFORE :
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 31st October, 2022
Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv. … for appellant Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. …for respondent
The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 28th February, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” Bench, Kolkata, in I.T.A. No. 2445/Kol/2016 for the assessment year 2007-08. The appeal was admitted on 3rd March, 2020 on the following substantial questions of law :-
“Whether the penalty proceedings under Section 27a(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are invalid if the show-cause notice does not specifically spell out the grounds for imposition of the proposed penalty?”
2 We have heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, learned standing Counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Ms. Swapna Das, learned Advocate, led by Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned senior Counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. On perusal of the order passed by the learned Tribunal, we find that he Tribunal had examined the factual position and found that the show cause notice issued under Section 274 of the Act was defective. The learned Tribunal had also noted various decisions of this Court wherein it has been held that when the notice issued under Section 274 of the Act was defective, the defect is incurable as it goes to the root of the matter. Therefore, we find that the Tribunal rightly granted relief to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The substantial question of law is answered against the revenue.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
S.Pal/SN
More judgments on Section 274
- Shamsunder Pritesh Malode, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-12(1), HyderabadITA 399/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2128/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4558/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3228/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Harshit Singhania Buildcon, RaipurITA 560/RPR/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026