IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2526/Del/2022 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13)

Shree Krishna Vanaspati Income Tax Officer, Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ward-23(3), Room No.221, Manish Vs. New Delhi.

Plaza, 20, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi-110002 PAN-AAICS1016R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Shri Vinit Garg, Advocate Department by Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement 21/02/2025

O R D E R

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM:

This is appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi (‘the CIT(A)’ for short) date 10/03/2017 in Appeal No. 342/15-16 for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a company and assessment was completed vide order dated 30.03.2015 by making various additions. Thereafter, the impugned order of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was passed wherein penalty of Rs.15,64,288/- was levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submit that at the time of initiation of the proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, notice was issued to the assessee vide notice dated 30/03/2015. The said notice is reproduced as under:

30/03/2015 To Shree Krishna Vanaspati Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Manish Plaza, 20, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi-110002 Whereas in the course of proceedings before me for the assessment year 2012-13 it appears to me that you:-

*have without reasonable cause failed to comply with a notice under section 142(1)/143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated.

"have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income in terms of explanation 1,2,3,4 and 5.

You are hereby requested to appear before me at 11:30 A.M./P.M.

on 200 and show cause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. If you do not wish to avail yourself of this opportunity of being heard in person or through authorized representative, you may show cause in writing on or before the said date which will be considered before any such order is made under section 271.

Vinod Kumar Assessing Officer Income Tax Officer Ward-23(3), New Delhi”

Subsequently another notice was issued on 31.08.2015.

“

To Dated: 31.08.2015 M/S Shree Krishna Vanaspati Industries Pvt. Ltd.

221, Munish Plaza, 20 Anasri Road, Daryaganj, Delhi Whereas in the course of proceedings before me for the assessment year-2012-13, it appears to me that you:-

"have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income in terms of explanation 1,2,3,4, and

5.

You are hereby requested to appear before me at 04.30 P.M on

04/09/2015 and show cause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 271 of the income Tax Act. 1961. If you do not wish to avail yourself of this opportunity of being heard in person or through authorized representative you may show cause in writing on or before the said date which will be considered before any such order is made under section 271 Vinod Kumar Income Tax Officer, Ward-23(3), New Delhi”

3. Ld. AR submit that from the perusal of the both notices it could be seen that in both notices, it was not specified whether the penalty proceedings were initiated for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. He thus, by following the order of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory reported in (2013) 359 ITR 565 requested for the deletion of the penalty being initiating without specifying the limb on which the penalty proceedings were initiated.

4. On the other hand, Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the AO has recorded the satisfaction in the assessment order that assessee has