Income Tax

Notice us 271(1)(b) on printed format with tick mark without striking off the non applicable clause quashed

Notice us 271(1)(b) on printed format with tick mark without striking off the non applicable clause quashed on the ground that charge was not specific. 

ITAT Delhi, in a recent judgment, has quashed notice u/s 271(1)(b) on printed format with only tick mark with striking off the not applicable clause on the ground that the “charge” was not specific. In recent past there had been many decisions whereby notice u/s 271(1)(c) has been quashed on the similar ground.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 1162 (2017) (03) ITAT

Assessment Year : 2007-08

Brief Facts of the Case:
The assessee had inter alia raised the following grounds:

That on the facts of the case and under the law, the penalty order passed u/s. 271(1)(b) is liable to be quashed/ annulled, because the “charge” was not specific.

The AO had initiated penalty proceedings vide notice issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271, by simply placing tick mark against the printed line “you have without reasonable failed to comply with a notice u/s. 23(4)/ 23(2) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 or u/s. 142(1)/143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

Observations made by the Tribunal:
The Tribunal found cogency in the submissions that the penalty order passed u/s. 271(1)(b) was liable to be quashed/ annulled, because the “charge” was not specific in the Notice dated 27.3.2015 issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271, in which AO has simply placed tick mark against the printed line “you have without reasonable failed to comply with a notice u/s. 23(4)/23(2) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 or u/s. 142(1)/143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated……..

The Tribunal opined that on this legal ground alone, the penalty deserved to be deleted.

Held:
Penalty was deleted. Appeal of the Assessee was allowed.

Download Full Judgment

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Deprecation allowable u/s 11(6) if capital expenditure not claimed as application of income

Assessee entitled to claim deprecation u/s 11(6) if corresponding capital expenditure was not claimed as application of income - ITAT…

15 hours ago
  • Income Tax

CBDT cautions CAs issuing certificates in Form 15CB/Form146 to exercise due care & diligence

Chartered Accountants issuing certificates in Form 15CB/Form146 are expected to exercise due care, diligence and professional judgment – CBDT CBDT…

17 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Section 292C carry no presumption of correctness of seized documents contents against third party

Section 292C of the Income Tax Act 1961 indeed carries presumption of correctness of such seized documents contents but only…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) for filing revised return to avail benefits u/s 44ADA

PCIT directed to consider condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) in filing revised return to availing benefits of section 44ADA In…

3 days ago
  • arbitration

Whether condition of pre-deposit prior to reference to Arbitration is arbitrary & violative of right to sue?

Whether condition of pre-deposit prior to reference to Arbitration is arbitrary and violative of the right to sue – Division…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

FAQs on Foreign Assets of Small Taxpayers Disclosure Scheme and Rule 2026

Frequently asked Questions on Foreign Assets of Small Taxpayers Disclosure Scheme and Rule 2026.  CBDT has released a FAQs on…

6 days ago