ITO, WARD- 2(5), DEHRADUN V. UTTRAKHAND POORV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LTD., DEHRADUN

ITA 4300/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9264 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-02-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 271(1)(c); 274; 73

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 4300/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(5), Dehradun-248001 Vs Uttrakhand Poorv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd., Station Sub Area, Garhi Cantt., Dehradun-248003 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACU7129D Assessee by : Sh. Sanjay Malik, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Poonam Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 10.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 08.02.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. CIT(A), Dehradun dated 28.04.2017. 2. The first issue is with regard to not recording the satisfaction of concealment and/or filing of inaccurate particulars of income. It is observed from the assessment order that after discussing the claim made by the assessee and disallowing the same, the AO has recorded, “ Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are being initiated separately for concealment/furnishing inaccurate particulars of its income.” The assessee has argued that while making the claim that the AO had not recorded her satisfaction with regard to concealment/furnishing inaccurate particulars. Since, in the present case, the satisfaction of concealment/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income have been recorded in the body of the Assessment Order, it can be said that the specific ITA No.4300/Del/2017 Uttrakhand Poorv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. 2 limb invoked for levy of penalty have not been clearly mentioned. Further, vide the penalty order dated 08.09.2016 at para 5, the ITO has imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for “ concealment of income/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income”. 3. On this issue, we are guided by the following judgments: 1) Karnataka High Court: CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory: 359 ITR 565 held that notice under section 274 should specifically state the grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c) of the Act, i.e., whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of incorrect particulars of income. Sending printed form where all the grounds mentioned in section 271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. 2) Bombay High Court: Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs ACIT Section 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Non-striking off of the irrelevant part while issuing notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, order is bad in law. Assessee must be informed of the ground of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice. An omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vagueness. 3) The Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. in ITA No. 475 of 2019, reiterated that notice under section 274 should specifically state the grounds on which penalty was sought to be imposed as the assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. 4) The aforesaid principle has been reiterated in the in the case of CIT vs. SSA'S Emerald Meadows: 73 taxmann.com 241 (Kar) [Revenue’s SLP dismissed in 242 Taxman 180] ITA No.4300/Del/2017 Uttrakhand Poorv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. 3 4. Hence, respectfully following the order of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, since the AO has not been specified u/s 274 as to whether penalty is proposed for alleged ‘concealment of income’ OR ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars of such income’, the penalty levied is hereby obliterated. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 08/02/2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 08/02/2022 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR