Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Lakshya Seth, Delhi vs Ito, New Delhi on 16 May, 2018
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCHES "A" : DELHI
BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. & SHRI L.P. SAHU, A.M.
ITA.No.852/Del./2016
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Shri Lakshya Seth,
Income Tax Officer,
50-B, Satyawati Colony, Vs
Ward-19(3),
Ashok Vihar, Delhi-052.
New Delhi.
PAN CDAPS0119M
(Appellant) (Respondent)
For Assessee : Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, C.A.
For Revenue : Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. D.R.
Date of Hearing : 16.05.2018
Date of Pronouncement : 16.05.2018
ORDER
PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.
This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-32, New Delhi, dated 14th December, 2015, for the A.Y. 2010-2011 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 show cause notice issued under section 274 2 ITA.No.852/Del./2016 Shri Lakshya Seth, Delhi.
r.w.s.271 of the I.T. Act dated 28th March, 2013 before levy of penalty is bad in law. Therefore, no penalty is leviable against the assessee. Copy of the notice is placed on record.
3. Ld. D.R. however, relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
4. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that penalty is not leviable in the matter. The A.O. issued show cause notice dated 28th March, 2013 before levy of the penalty against the assessee in which the A.O. has recorded as under :
"have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income in terms of explanation 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5."
4.1. These facts, therefore, clearly show that notice issued by the A.O. for levy of 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 3 ITA.No.852/Del./2016 Shri Lakshya Seth, Delhi.
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. This decision is confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 73 taxmann.com 248. In this view of the matter, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and penalty is cancelled.
5. In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/-
(LP SAHU) (BHAVNESH SAINI)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Delhi, Dated 15th May, 2018
VBP/-
4
ITA.No.852/Del./2016 Shri Lakshya Seth, Delhi.
Copy to
1. The applicant
2. The respondent
3. CIT(A) concerned
4. CIT concerned
5. D.R. ITAT 'A' Bench, Delhi
6. Guard File.
// BY Order // Assistant Registrar : ITAT Delhi Benches :
Delhi.