PCIT Vs Bijoy Kumar Agarwal (Calcutta High Court)
A Calcutta High Court ruling dismissed an appeal by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax against Bijoy Kumar Agarwal, upholding the invalidation of a penalty notice issued under Section 272(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court found the notice to be technically defective as it failed to specify the exact contravention committed by the assessee.
This decision aligns with established judicial precedents, including the Supreme Court’s ruling in Amrit Foods Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, U. P. (2005) 13 SCC 419, and previous judgments by the Calcutta, Karnataka, and Bombay High Courts. The court clarified that its review was limited to the technical flaw in the notice, without delving into other aspects of the case. Consequently, the appeal and stay application were dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
By consent of the parties, this appeal is heard out, dispensing with all formalities and disposed of by this judgment and order.
There is no merit in this intended appeal. The impugned notice under Section 272(1)(c) does not specify which of the two contraventions, the assessee is guilty of.
For those reasons, the notice is bad. We are supported in our view by the decision of the Supreme Court in Amrit Foods Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, U. P. reported in (2005) 13 SCC 419, a Division Bench of our Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 19, Kolkata Versus Dr. Murari Mohan Koley, ITAT No. 306 of 2017 (so far unreported) decided on 18th July, 2018, judgements of the Karnataka and Bombay High Courts referred to in the preceding judgement and an unreported judgement of the Division Bench in Principal CIT – 1, Kolkata Versus M/S. SRMB Srijan Ltd. made on 26th February, 2019 on the same point.
