Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK
Before: SHRI N.S SAINI
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1,
Bhubaneswar, dated 23.12.2014 for the assessment year 2008-09.
The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the ld CIT(A) erred in
confirming the levy of penalty of Rs.6,44,930/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act.
At the outset, ld Authorised Representative of the assessee argued
and submitted that the Assessing Officer in the penalty order while levying
penalty has observed that the assessee has concealed particulars of income
as well as furnished inaccurate particulars of income. According to the
2 ITA No. 104/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year : 20 08- 09
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. SSA’s. Emarld
Meadows dated 11th January, 2017 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (CC
No.11485/2016), the Assessing Officer has to categorically state in his order or
notice issued u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act as to whether the assessee is guilty of
concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. He
submitted that if the order or notice suffers from this infirmity, the penalty order
cannot be sustained in law. Hence, he submitted that penalty of Rs.6,44,930/-
imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s.271(1)(c) is, therefore, liable to be cancelled.
The Departmental Representative could not controvert the above
submission of ld Authorised Representative of the assessee.
After considering the rival submissions and perusing the orders of lower
authorities, I find that the facts in the present appeal are not in dispute and the
Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s.271(1)(c) dated 26.3.2013 levied
penalty of Rs.6,44,930/- observing as under:
“All these types of attempts amount to concealment of particulars of one’s income as well as furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Ion view thereof, penalty may be imposed for either or both of such attempts.”
Therefore, the facts of the present appeal are identical to the facts of the
case before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SSA’s. Emarld
Meadows(supra) and, therefore, the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court squarely
applies to the case of the assessee. Hence, respectfully following the same, I
cancel the levy of penalty of Rs.6,44,930/- u/s.271(1)(c) and allow the ground of
appeal of the assessee.
3 ITA No. 104/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year : 20 08- 09
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22/03/2017 in the presence of parties.
Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Cuttack; Dated 22/03/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Swastik Ingot Private Limited, At: Gopapali, Vedvyas, Rourkela 2. The Respondent. DCIT, Rourkela 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar. 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaneswar. 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER,
SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack