S. 271(1)(c), S.274, Court (Cuttack)(Trib.), Penalty-Concealment-Inapplicable words in notice not struck off-Penalty order not specifying exactly under which limb penalty is levied-Penalty is held to be unjustified. [S. 274]

 Section :- S. 271(1)(c), S.274

Court (Cuttack)(Trib.)

Penalty-Concealment-Inapplicable words in notice not struck off-Penalty order not specifying exactly under which limb penalty is levied-Penalty is held to be unjustified. [S. 274]

The AO levied penalty which was confirmed by the CIT(A) On appeal the Tribunal held that notices under S. 274 read with S. 271(1)(c) issued to the assessee showed the inapplicable words in the notice had not been struck out. Even the last line of the notice only spoke of S. 271 and did not mention of S. 271(1)(c). The penalty order was based on furnishing of inaccurate particulars but the notice did not specify exactly under which limb the penalty under S. 271(1)(c) had been initiated. The AO was not sure under which limb of provisions of S. 271 the assessee was liable for penalty. The penalty levied under S. 271(1)(c) was not sustainable. (AY.2011-12)

Dibyajyoti Chemicals P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 77 ITR 40 (SN) (Cuttack)(Trib.)