Case Law Details
Dinesh Sitaram Patil Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
We note that, while culminating the reassessment proceeding in the case of the assessee, the Ld. AO vide concluding para placed at page 4 of his order communicated the assessee his action of initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of Act for ‘under reporting / mis-reporting’ of income however by the impugned order has ended up levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for ‘furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’, which found perfunctory sustained by the Ld. CIT(A).
Undisputedly in the present case before us, the Ld. AO in the course of reassessment proceedings has recorded his satisfaction for ‘under reporting / mis-reporting’ of income and de-facto initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of Act, this per-se sufficient to demonstrate his non-application of mind while recording satisfaction vis-à-vis initiation of penal proceedings.
In the light of undisputed facts and aforestated deliberation, we are of the considered view that the necessity for prima facie satisfaction triggering initiation of penal proceedings continues to be a jurisdictional fact and same should discernible from the body of assessment order, which in the present case a miss, consequently we have no hesitation in holding the very basis of initiation of penal proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) suffers from infirmity hence bad in law and deserves to be quashed and accordingly quashed by ITAT.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
one party has been imposed penalty U/S 271(1)(c) as well as 271F after completion of face to face assessment for the AY 2015-16 and got assessment order in favor on 11-10-2022. Further he received show cause notice on 25-02-2023 for penalty US 271(a)(c) and 271F. Party has sent reply properly in faceless manner within due date. Again he received penalty order, computation sheets and Demand notice u/s as above to pay both.please advise if any remedies on it.