Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Assessee has raised the ground that The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer and confirming the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) amounting to Rs. 2,96,254/-.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961— Penalty — Concealment Penalty - It is a well settled proposition of law that penalty cannot be initiated for the limb, which is different from the limb for which proposed penalty proceedings has been initiated, further, if the penalty proceedings has been initiated for one limb and levied under different limb, then the whole penalty proceedings become vitiate and AO has to arrive at clear satisfaction regarding the limb under which, he proposed to levy penalty before issue of notice u/s 274 r.w.s 271(1)(c) - If notice is issued for one limb and penalty is levied for another limb then, the whole proceedings become void ab-inito and liable to be quashed and in the case of assessee, AO has failed to arrive at clear satisfaction, as regards, the limb under which the proposed penalty proceedings has been initiated and said lapse was even continued in the order imposing penalty, therefore, the order imposing penalty passed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) is illegal and bad in law - RAJARAM STOCK BROKING CO. V/s ITO - [2020] 27 ITCD Online 069 (ITAT-MUMBAI)