SH.MOHIT BATOLA,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, CC, DDN, DEHRADUN

ITA 101/DDN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun30 October 2025AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notices issued for the initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were not specific. The notices failed to mention whether the proceedings were for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, thereby indicating a non-application of mind by the AO. The Tribunal relied on various High Court and Supreme Court judgments to support this view.

What were the facts?

A search action was conducted at the assessee's premises, leading to the issuance of notices under Section 153A. The Assessing Officer (AO) passed an assessment order, and subsequently, a penalty was levied under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The assessee appealed against the penalty order.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty proceedings initiated by the AO were valid when the notice under Section 274 did not specify whether the penalty was 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,Section 153A,Section 144

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, DEHRADUN “DB” BENCH: DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Verendra Kalra, CA
For Respondent: Shri S.K.Chaterjee, CIT DR
Hearing: 05.08.2025Pronounced: 30.10.2025

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM :

The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 23.04.2024 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-3, Noida [“Ld.CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT(A), Kanpur-4/10044/2009-10 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the penalty order dated 09.03.2021 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act pertaining to assessment year 2010-11. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, engaged in the business of providing land to big developers as well as purchase and sale of land/development work on land of others and also director of various different companies. A search action was conducted u/s 132 o

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 →