ST. JOSEPHS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCOT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

142 taxmann.com 38 • Hon’ble ITAT – Chennai – ShriMelekandyPuthalathFarookVs ACIT – ITA No. 1890/CHNY/2024 dated 05-11-2024 • Hon’ble ITAT – Chennai – Enrica Enterprises P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2024] 163 taxmann.com 105 • Hon’ble ITAT- Delhi – Jaina Marketing & Associates Vs DCIT [2024] 162 taxmann.com 439 (Delhi - Trib.) ITA Nos.3293 & 3294/Chny/2024 (AYs 2018-19 & 2020-21) St. Joseph’s Educational Trust & ITA Nos.3295

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. GHISULAI KOTHARI, CHENNAI

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) is initiated separately. Penalty u/s 271F is also initiated. It could be seen that Ld. AO initiated penalty under various provisions and subsequently, issued show-cause notice to the assessee to defend the proposed penalty u/s 271AAB. Subsequently, a show-cause notice was issued by Ld. AO to the assessee on 31.03.2015 the substantial portion of which

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

SHRI MAHAVEERCHAND JAIN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CC4(2), CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed on similar lines

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

penalty proceedings were initiated against the assessee and notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was issued on 30.03.2006 which read as under: - ITNS-29 NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE –II-(2), 46, NEW BUILDING, I FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI

D.SENTHIL KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 139”. From the above, it is clear that the legislation did not mandate issuance of a notice for Penalty proceeding hearing whereas for all other proceeding hearing, the legislation mandated issuance of a notice. The logic being, u/s 271 of the Income tax Act, penalty proceedings are initiated or have to be initiated during the pendency of assessment

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. S & P FOUNDATION P. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2084/Chny/2013 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2006-07 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. S & P Foundation P. Ltd., Income Tax, Central Circle Iv(2), Vs. Old No. 27, New No. 38, Madley Road, 46, Nungambakkam High Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaics0224K] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & : Shri I Dinesh, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 02.12.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Ii, Chennai, Dated 05.12.2012 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2006-07 In Pursuance To The Order Of The Assessing Officer In Levying Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

142(1) of the Act were issued and assessment was completed under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 31.12.2009 determining the total income of the assessee at ₹.2,55,26,240/-. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer has initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and levied minimum penalty

ST. JOSHEPHS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-193), CHENNAI

142 taxmann.com 38\n• Hon'ble ITAT - Chennai ShriMelekandyPuthalathFarookVs ACIT ITA No. 1890/CHNY/2024\ndated 05-11-2024\n• Hon'ble ITAT – Chennai – Enrica Enterprises P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2024] 163 taxmann.com 105\n• Hon'ble ITAT- Delhi Jaina Marketing & Associates Vs DCIT [2024] 162 taxmann.com 439\n(Delhi - Trib.)\n:: 14 ::\nITA Nos.3293 & 3294/Chny/2024

ST. JOSEPHS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-193), CHENNAI

142 taxmann.com 38\n•\nHon'ble ITAT - Chennai\nShriMelekandyPuthalathFarookVs ACIT ITA No. 1890/CHNY/2024\ndated 05-11-2024\n•\nHon'ble ITAT – Chennai – Enrica Enterprises P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2024] 163 taxmann.com 105\n•\nHon'ble ITAT- Delhi\nJaina Marketing & Associates Vs DCIT [2024] 162 taxmann.com 439\n(Delhi - Trib.)\n:: 14 ::\nFollowing the Hon'ble SC decision in the case

MUTHURATHINAM,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), TIRUPPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2656/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-2014) Muthurathinam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 27/29, Kumarappapuram, Ward 1(2) 1St Street, Rayapuram Extension, Tirupur. Tirupur 641 601. [Pan: Avypm 0862D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, (Erode) Advocate By Virtual. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Irs, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 31.12.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri () This Penalty Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 21.08.2024 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Issue Sought To Be Urged By The Assessee In This Appeal Is Whether The Cit(A) Was Justified In Upholding The Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act"] By Ignoring The Fact That The Assessing Officer (‘Ao’ In Short) In Assessment Order Dated 28.09.2021 Has Satisfied That Penalty Proceeding Is Being Initiated Separately For “Furnishing Of Inaccurate Particulars Of Such Income” Where As Penalty Order U/S 271(1)(C) Dated 04.01.2022 Levied Penalty For “Concealment Of Income”, Although In The Notice Under Section 274 Read With Section 271(1) (C), The Ao Has Marked The Specified Limb As “That You Have Furnished Inaccurate Particulars Of Such Income”.

penalty for “concealment of income”, although in the notice under Section 274 read with Section 271(1) (c), the AO has marked the specified limb as “that you have furnished inaccurate particulars of such income”. 3. For the sake of convenience, it will be apposite to refer to the facts of the case. Shorn of all necessary details, the facts

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. SARDARMAL KOTHARI, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s petition as filed u/r 27 stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) is initiated separately. Penalty u/s 271F is also initiated. It could be seen that Ld. AO initiated penalty under various provisions and subsequently, issued show-cause notice to the assessee to defend the proposed penalty u/s 271AAB. Subsequently, a show-cause notice was issued by Ld. AO to the assessee on 31.03.2015 the substantial portion of which

ACIT CENTRLA CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. SHANTILAL KOTHARI, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s petition as filed u/r 27 stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) is initiated separately. Penalty u/s 271F is also initiated. It could be seen that Ld. AO initiated penalty under various provisions and subsequently, issued show-cause notice to the assessee to defend the proposed penalty u/s 271AAB. Subsequently, a show-cause notice was issued by Ld. AO to the assessee on 31.03.2015 the substantial portion of which

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. KEWALCHAND KOTHARI, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s petition as filed u/r 27 stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

271(1)(c) is initiated separately. Penalty u/s 271F is also initiated. It could be seen that Ld. AO initiated penalty under various provisions and subsequently, issued show-cause notice to the assessee to defend the proposed penalty u/s 271AAB. Subsequently, a show-cause notice was issued by Ld. AO to the assessee on 31.03.2015 the substantial portion of which

SHRI.S.J.SURYAH,CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.806/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2002-03 V. Shri S.J.Suryah, The Asst. Commissioner- No.35-1D, Of Income Tax, 114, Neelakanta Mehta Street, Central Circle-2(4), T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Alyps 3012 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

271 nor section 274 of the Act mandates issuance of any notice. This language use, when in comparison with Section 142(1), which is reproduced as under: “For the purpose of making an assessment under this Act, the Assessing Officer may serve on any person who has made a return... .......... a notice requiring him, a date to be therein specified