Sehgal Packaging Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO ward-23(1), New Delhi

ITA 6705/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1369 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 271(1)(c); 143(3); 274; 73

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-1, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA NO. 6705/DEL/2019 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2015-16 SEHGAL PACKAGING PVT. LTD., A-44, NARAINA INDL. AREA, NEW DELHI-110028 VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-23(1), NEW DELHI-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AADCS3735J ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. R. K. GUPTA, SR. DR DATE OF HEAR ING: 1 7 . 06 .20 2 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 .06 .20 2 1 ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-8, NEW DELHI DATED 10.0 5.2019. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESS EE: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) AT RS.30,380/- MERELY ON SURMISES AND CONJECTURES AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN IGNORING THE FACTS UNDER WHICH THE ADDITIONS WAS MADE U/S 143(3) ORDER AND IGNORING THE SUBMISSION MADE AND RECORDED BY HIM ON THE PROCESS SHEET. 3. THAT THE PENALTY AS IMPOSED AT RS.30,380/- IS ILLEGAL AND DESERVES TO BE CANCELLED. ITA NO. 6705/DEL/2019 SEHGAL PACKAGING PVT. LTD. 2 3. THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS.98,318/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF ROC FEE PAID TOWARDS INCREASE IN THE AUTHORIZED SHARE CAPITAL. CONSEQUENT TO THE DISALLOWANCE, PENA LTY U/S 271(1)(C) HAS BEEN LEVIED BY THE AO. 4. WE FIND THAT THE PAGE NO. 2 BELOW PARA 5, THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 OR FURNISHING INACCURAT E PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND CONCEALMENT OF INCOME IS ALSO INITIATED SEPARATELY . 5. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE PARA NO. 3 OF THE PENALTY ORDER READS AS UNDER: 3. THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE IN COME TAX ACT, 1961 WAS ALSO INITIATED FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE P ARTICULARS OF INCOME AND CONCEALING INCOME THEREOF. ACCORDINGLY, A NOTICE U/S 274 READ WITH SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED T O THE ASSESSEES COMPANY ON 12.05.2017. 6. ON THIS ISSUE, WE ARE GUIDED BY THE FOLLOWING JU DGMENTS: 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., WH ETHER IT IS FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FOR FURNISHING OF I NCORRECT PARTICULARS OF INCOME. SENDING PRINTED FORM WHERE A LL THE GROUNDS MENTIONED IN SECTION 271 ARE MENTIONED WOUL D NOT SATISFY REQUIREMENT OF LAW. 2) BOMBAY HIGH COURT: MR. MOHD. FARHAN A. SHAIKH VS AC IT 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 ITA NO. 6705/DEL/2019 SEHGAL PACKAGING PVT. LTD. 3 INFORMED OF THE GROUND OF THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS O NLY THROUGH STATUTORY NOTICE. AN OMNIBUS NOTICE SUFFERS FROM THE VICE OF VAGUENESS. 3) THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PCIT VS. SAHARA INDIA LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. IN IT A NO. 475 OF 2019, REITERATED THAT NOTICE UNDER SECTION 2 74 SHOULD SPECIFICALLY STATE THE GROUNDS ON WHICH PENA LTY WAS SOUGHT TO BE IMPOSED AS THE ASSESSEE SHOULD KNOW TH E 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.C OM 241 (KAR) [REVENUES SLP DISMISSED IN 242 TAXMAN 18 0] 7. HENCE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE H ONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, SINCE THE AO HAS NOT BEE N SPECIFIED U/S 274 AS TO WHETHER PENALTY IS PROPOSED FOR ALLEG ED CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FURNISHING OF INACCURAT E PARTICULARS OF SUCH INCOME, THE PENALTY LEVIED IS HEREBY OBLIT ERATED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ALLOWE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29/06/2021. SD/- SD/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B. R. R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER AC COUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 29/06/2021 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR