Tax Appellate Tribunal cancels penalty under IT Act for inaccurate income particulars The ITAT upheld the decision of the CIT(A) to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act on the assessee for furnishing inaccurate ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tax Appellate Tribunal cancels penalty under IT Act for inaccurate income particulars
The ITAT upheld the decision of the CIT(A) to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act on the assessee for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The CIT(A) found that the appellant had provided all necessary particulars in good faith, and the concealment of income was not deliberate. The ITAT agreed that the penalty could not be imposed based on differing opinions on certain payments made in different financial years. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the penalty of Rs. 21,08,228/- was deleted.
Issues Involved: The only issue raised in this appeal is the deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act amounting to Rs. 21,08,228/- levied by the AO for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
Issue 1: Deletion of Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act The AO imposed a penalty of Rs. 21,08,228/- on the assessee for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income amounting to Rs. 59,05,401/- for A.Yr. 2004-05. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty citing that the appellant had furnished all necessary particulars and the concealment of income was not deliberate. The CIT(A) observed that the penalty could not be imposed solely based on diverse views on certain payments made during different financial years. The ITAT confirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty, stating that the assessee had adopted a plausible view based on divergent opinions and claimed exemption under section 43B of the IT Act in good faith. Therefore, the provision of section 271(1)(c) was deemed not applicable, and the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed.
Separate Judgement: No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
TaxTMI 
