Case Law Details
Sanraj Engineering (P) Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified, where both the assessment order and show cause notice failed to state the specific charge of concealment and/or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the order dated 29.09.20 16 in appeal No.84/13-14 passing by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [in short “CIT(A)”]-28, New Delhi for 2006-07 Assessment Year, assessee preferred this appeal on the following grounds: –
“That the order dated 29.09.2016 passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is against law and facts on the file as he was not just ified to partly uphold the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in restricting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of rs.71,99,070/- (as against Rs.81,68,916/- imposed by the Ld. Assessing Officer) by granting relief of only Rs.8,69,846/- for alleged concealment/furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the legal position in much as no such penalty is exigible in the facts & circumstances of the case.”
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
