Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

ITAT Indore Quashes Penalty for Defective Section 274 Notice Without Specific Charge

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2026 taxguru.in 10760
Case Name
Dwarka Prasad Tayal Vs ITO (ITAT Indore)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2011-12
Advertisement

Dwarka Prasad Tayal Vs ITO (ITAT Indore)

The appeal before the ITAT Indore concerned an assessee’s challenge to a penalty of Rs.30,00,000 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2011-12. The appeal was directed against the order of the First Appellate Authority dated 07.07.2014, arising from the penalty proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer. The assessee raised a legal objection that the show-cause notice dated 07.07.2014 issued under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) was defective because the Assessing Officer had not specified the particular charge against the assessee by striking off the inapplicable limb—whether concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The assessee relied on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Kulwant Singh Bhatia, ITA Nos. 910,11,12,13 & 14 of 2018, order dated 09.05.2018, and the ITAT decision in Dhanjraj Distributors Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No. 950/Ind/2019 dated 22.06.2023.

The Departmental Representative supported the order of the CIT(A) and submitted that the Assessing Officer’s failure to strike off the inapplicable limb was merely clerical and should not invalidate the penalty proceedings.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee was an individual and that assessment under Section 143(3) for A.Y. 2011-12 had been completed on 07.07.2014, determining income at Rs.4,73,51,720. The Assessing Officer had assessed business income at 5% of turnover and made additions for undisclosed investment and undisclosed business. The assessee succeeded in the quantum proceedings. However, additional income offered through a revised computation was treated by the Assessing Officer as furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, leading to initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c).

Paid content

Become a Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Sandeep Kanoi
Qualification: CA in Job / Business
Company: Taxguru Consultancy
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 20,835

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.