M/S. L M Bhandari, Pune V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 7, Pune

ITA 1141/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1152 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 25-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1141/PUN/2018 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s. L M Bhandari Amar Avinash Corporate City, 4 th Floor, Bund Garden Road, Near Inox Multiplex, Pune – 411001 PAN : AAABFB1824C Vs. DCIT, Circle 7, Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JM : This assessee‟s appeal for AY 2013-14 arises against the CIT(A), Pune-5‟s order dated 18-04-2018 passed in case No. PN/CIT(A)-5/DCIT, Circle-7, Pune/10551/2016-17 involving proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in short „the Act‟. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee‟s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. Coming to assessee‟s sole substantive grievance that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in imposing section 271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.1,52,908/-, we note at the outset from the perusal of Assessing Officer‟s corresponding show cause notice dated 03.03.2016 that Assessee by None Revenue by Shri S.P. Walimbe Date of hearing 27-06-2022 Date of pronouncement 30-06-2022 ITA No.1141/PUN/2018 L M Bhandari 2 he had nowhere specified as to whether this taxpayer‟s act and conduct during the course of assessment amounted to concealment of particulars of taxable income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income. 3. Mr. Walimbe vehemently argued that the learned Assessing Officer had duly applied both the “or” as well as “and” limbs of the foregoing twin contingencies whilst initiating the impugned penalty. We find no merit in the Revenue‟s instant argument as such a penalty show cause notice reflects the Assessing Officer‟s foregoing failure which has been held fatal to the validity of the proceedings itself as per honourable jurisdictional high court‟s recent landmark decision in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom) (FB). We, therefore, delete the impugned penalty for this precise reason alone. Ordered accordingly. All other grounds on merits stand rendered academic. 4. This assessee‟s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30 th June, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (DIPAK P. RIPOTE) (S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER प ु णे Pune; ददिधांक Dated : 30 th June, 2022 GCVSR ITA No.1141/PUN/2018 L M Bhandari 3 आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent; 3. The CIT(A), Pune-5, Pune 4. 5. The Pr.CIT, Pune-4, Pune विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, पुणे “A” / DR „A‟, ITAT, Pune 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Date 1. Draft dictated on 27-06-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 28-06-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order.