Tribunal held that since the Commissioner (Appeals) giving relief to the assessee on various additions had attained finality in view of the dismissal of the appeal filed by the Revenue before the Tribunal and the various additions of income had been set aside for the assessment year, there was no question of imposing penalty. The Department’s appeal did not survive. Tribunal also held that the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271AAA did not mention the particular limb of the Explanation to section 271AAA under which penalty was proposed to be levied. Rather, the notice reproduced the language of section 271(1)(c) and not section 271AAA. Therefore, the notice was vague and had to be treated as invalid. Since the notice clearly showed non-application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer and there was no specific ground on which the penalty proceedings had been initiated, the notice issued under section 274 read with section 271AAA was bad in law and, therefore invalid. (AY.2012-13)
ACIT v. Sanjiv Gupta (2020) 84 ITR 29 (Delhi)(Trib.)
S. 271AAA : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007-Concealment-Additions deleted-Penalty does not survive-Notice not mentioning specific limb of explanation-Penalty not imposable. [S. 274]