| COURT: | Karnataka High Court |
| CORAM: | N. K. Patil J, S. Sujatha J |
| SECTION(S): | 271(1-B), 271(1)(c) |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | concealment of income, furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, penalty, satisfaction |
| COUNSEL: | K. K. Chythanya |
| DATE: | January 25, 2016 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | February 12, 2016 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2001-02 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 271(1)(c)/ 271(1-B): If the notice is issued without application of mind (by striking out the relevant part in the notice), the penalty proceedings are invalid | |
It is clear that the notice is issued proposing to levy penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act whereas the order is passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act which clearly indicates that there was no application of mind by the Assessing Officer while issuing the notice under Section 274 of the Act. As regards Section 271(1-B) of the Act, it clearly indicates that the assessment order should contain a direction for initiation of proceedings. Merely saying that the penalty proceedings have been initiated would not satisfy the requirement, a direction to initiate proceeding shall be clear and not be ambiguous
Recent Comments