Case Law Details
Addl. CIT Vs Airports Authority of India (ITAT Delhi)
Perusal of the order passed by the ld. CIT (A) shows that the ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty on two grounds : (i) that no valid notice u/s 274 of the Act has been issued to the assessee so as to inform the assessee as to under which limb of section 271(1)(c) penalty proceedings have been initiated; and (ii) that disallowances of claim made by the assessee for incurring expenditure on account of R&D does not come under the purview of section 271(1)(c) of the Act and relied upon the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. 322 ITR 158 (SC) and CIT vs. SSA’s Emerald Meadows (2016) 73 com 248.
DR for the Revenue except for relying upon the order passed by the AO has failed to bring on record if valid notice u/s 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Act was issued to the assessee and that mere claim of expenditure by the assessee if disallowed does not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealing particulars of income during assessment proceedings.
When the notice issued by the AO is bad in law being vague and ambiguous having not specified under which limb of section 271(1)(c) of the Act the same has been issued, the penalty proceedings initiated u/s 271(1)(c) are not sustainable.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
