Subject: D.R. relied upon Orders of the authorities below and submitted that failure of the A.O
Referred Sections:
Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.
Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act,
Referred Cases / Judgments
Order of ITAT, Delhi SMC-Bench in the case of Shri Jivan Dhingra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-33(5), New Delhi in ITA.No.5373/Del./2018
Order of ITAT, Delhi G-Bench in the case of Sanjay Mittra, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi in ITA.No.5206/Del./2016
CIT vs. M/s. SSAs Emerald Meadows 73 taxmann.com 241
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCHES "SMC": DELHI
BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA.No.307/Del./2019
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Khatri,
New Delhi. The Income Tax Officer,
PAN AKNPK5470F vs., Ward-2(3),
C/o. M/s. RRA TAX INDIA,
D-28, South Extension, Faridabad.
Part-1, New Delhi110049.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Shri Somil Agarwal, And
For Assessee : Ms. Monika Ghai,
Advocates.
For Revenue : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR
Date of Hearing : 04.06.2019
Date of Pronouncement : 04.06.2019
ORDER
This appeal by Assessee has been directed
against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad, Dated
28.11.2018, for the A.Y. 2007-2008, challenging the levy of
penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.
2. Learned Counsel for the Assessee, at the outset,
submitted that the A.O. issued show cause notice before
2
ITA.No.307/Del./2019
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Khatri, New Delhi.
levy of the penalty Dated 30/31.03.2015 in which the A.O.
has mentioned as under :
"Have concealed the particulars of your income or
furnished inaccurate particulars of such income under
section 271(1)(c)."
2.1. Learned Counsel for the Assessee, therefore,
submitted that since it is not mentioned in the notice as to
under which limb of Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, penalty
proceedings are initiated, therefore, notice is defective and
invalid and the penalty is liable to be cancelled. He has
relied upon the following Orders ITAT, Delhi Bench :
(i) Order of ITAT, Delhi SMC-Bench in the case of
Shri Jivan Dhingra, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-
33(5), New Delhi in ITA.No.5373/Del./2018
Dated 01.05.2019.
(ii) Order of ITAT, Delhi G-Bench in the case of
Sanjay Mittra, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-
26, New Delhi in ITA.No.5206/Del./2016, Dated
01.10.2018.
3
ITA.No.307/Del./2019
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Khatri, New Delhi.
3. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon 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.
4. I have considered the rival submissions. In this
case, the A.O. issued show cause notice Dated
30/31.03.2015 before levy of the penalty under section
271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. From the perusal of the show
cause notice Dated 30/31.03.2015, it is clear that the show
cause notice issued by the A.O. for levy of the 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
4
ITA.No.307/Del./2019
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Khatri, New Delhi.
confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 73
taxmann.com 248. On similar set of facts, 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
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.
5. In the result, appeal of assessee allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Sd/-
(BHAVNESH SAINI)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Delhi, Dated 04th June, 2019
VBP/-
Copy to
1. The appellant
2. The respondent
3. CIT(A) concerned
4. CIT concerned
5. D.R. ITAT "SMC" Bench
6. Guard File
5
ITA.No.307/Del./2019
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Khatri, New Delhi.
//By Order//
Asst. Registrar : ITAT : Delhi Benches :
Delhi.
|
