Penalty for debatable Section 14A disallowance was unsustainable absent concealment of income.

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the disallowance arose from a debatable Section 14A controversy and there was no concealment of income. The authorities treated the underlying tax position as highly arguable, so the assessee's claim could not be treated as furnishing inaccurate particulars merely because the deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) was disallowed on a Section 14A basis. The Tribunal's remarks on the assessee's intention in holding shares were clarified as submissions, not an operative finding affecting the result. The deletion of penalty was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was sustainable when the disallowance related to Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was a debatable issue and there was no concealment of particulars of income.

Analysis: The appeal arose from penalty proceedings where the assessee had claimed interest under Section 36(1)(iii), which was disallowed by applying Section 14A. The appellate authorities treated the controversy on Section 14A as highly debatable. In such circumstances, concealment of income could not be inferred for the purpose of penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The observations of the Tribunal regarding the assessee's intention in holding shares were clarified as submissions and not as an operative finding affecting the result.

Conclusion: The deletion of penalty was upheld and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee.

---