Kodicherla Srinivas, Hyderabad, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-4(2), Hyderabad, Hyderabad

ITA 1491/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2538 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: U MINICHANDRAN
• Assessee Lawyers: K A SAI PRASAD
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1491/HYD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SRI KODICHERLA SRINIVAS, HYDERABAD [PAN: ADOPK9301R] VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI K.A. SAI PRASAD, AR FOR REVENUE : SMT U. MINICHANDRAN, DR DATE OF HEARING : 26-04-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26-04-2017 O R D E R PER D. MANMOHAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I , HYDERABAD AND IT PERTAINS TO THE AY. 2010-11. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT [ACT], ON MERITS, A TECHNICAL OBJECTION WAS RAISED WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S. 274 R.W.S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT BY PL ACING RELIANCE ON A DECISION OF THE ITAT B BENCH, HYDERABAD IN THE C ASE OF SRI MULA CHANDRA MOHAN GOUD, IN ITA NO. 594/HYD/2016 DT. 30-1 2-2016, WHEREIN THE BENCH QUASHED THE PROCEEDINGS BY OBSERVIN G AS UNDER: I.T.A. NO. 1491/HYD/2016 SRI KODICHERLA SRINIVAS :- 2 - : 9. ASSESSEE IN THE APPEAL HAS RAISED AN ADDITIONA L GROUND CONTESTING THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED DOES NOT SPECIFY WHETHER THE PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED FOR CONCEALMENT OF PENALTY OR FOR FURN ISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS. THE COPY OF THE NOTICE PLACED ON REC ORD DO INDICATE THAT IT IS A PRINTED PROFORMA, WITHOUT STRIKING-OFF THE RELEVANT COLUMNS AND SIMPLY SIGNED BY THE AO WHICH HAS SERVED ON ASSESSEE. ON S IMILAR FACTS, THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MANJUNA THA COTTON & GINNING FACTORY [359 ITR 565] (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT THE PRACTICE OF THE DEPARTMENT SENDING A PRINTED FORM WHERE ALL THE GRO UNDS MENTIONED IN 271 ARE MENTIONED WOULD NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF LAW WHEN THE CONSEQUENCE OF ASSESSEE NOT REBUTTING THE INITIAL P RESUMPTION IS SERIOUS IN NATURE AND HE HAD TO PAY PENALTY FROM 10% TO 300% O F TAX LIABILITY. AS THE SAID PROVISIONS HAVE TO BE HELD TO BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED, NOTICE U/S. 274 SHOULD SATISFY THE GROUNDS WHICH HE HAS TO MEET SPE CIFICALLY. OTHERWISE, THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ARE OFFENDED, IF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE IS VAGUE. ON THE BASIS OF SUCH PROCEEDINGS, NO PENALT Y COULD BE IMPOSED ON ASSESSEE. 2. THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL IN THIS CASE ALSO SINCE NOT ICE DT. 15-03-2013 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) U /S. 274 R.W.S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS VAGUE AND IT DOES NOT SPECIFY W HETHER THE PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED FOR CONCEALMENT OF PENALTY OR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS. 3. UPON HEARING THE LD.DR ALSO IN THIS REGARD, WE AR E OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE STANDS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECIS ION OF THE ITAT B BENCH, HYDERABAD SUPRA AND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE AO BEING VAGUE, THE CONSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS ARE LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. IN THE RESULT, PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO IS HEREBY CANC ELLED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 TH APRIL, 2017 UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING SD/- SD/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (D. MANMOH AN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT HYDERABAD, DATED 26 TH APRIL, 2017 TNMM I.T.A. NO. 1491/HYD/2016 SRI KODICHERLA SRINIVAS :- 3 - : COPY TO : 1. SRI KODICHERLA SRINIVAS, HYDERABAD. C/O. CH. PARTHASARATHY & CO., 1-1-298/2/B/3, 1 ST FLOOR, SOWBHAGYA AVENUE, ST. NO. 1, ASHOK NAGAR, HYDERABAD . 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD. 3. CIT (APPEALS)-1, HYDERABAD. 4. PR.CIT-1, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.