Tribunal cancels penalty for inaccurate particulars under Section 271(1)(c) for AY 2006-07

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, canceling the penalty of Rs. 2,55,53,890 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for Assessment Year 2006-07, as the denial of the deduction under Section 80IA did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars, based on legitimate grounds and separate claim, as per legal precedents and Supreme Court decision.

---

---

Issues:
Levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2006-07.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Levy of Penalty under Section 271(1)(c)
The appeal by the assessee was focused on the solitary issue regarding the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for the Assessment Year 2006-07, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee had initially filed a return disclosing a total income and later revised it due to a claim of expenditure under Section 35AC. The scrutiny assessment was completed, disallowing a deduction claimed under Section 80IA, leading to the imposition of a penalty by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) upheld the penalty, prompting the appeal before the Tribunal.

Issue 2: Arguments of the Assessee
The counsel for the assessee argued that the penalty should be canceled as the disallowance of the deduction under Section 80IA did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The counsel highlighted that the claim was based on legitimate grounds and that the denial of the deduction should not trigger penalty provisions. Citing relevant legal precedents, the counsel contended that the claim made in the return, even if not sustainable, did not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars.

Issue 3: Revenue's Position
The CIT-DR opposed the assessee's arguments, stating that the disallowance of the deduction under Section 80IA constituted furnishing inaccurate particulars. The revenue contended that the failure to provide separate books of account for the eligible business led to inaccurate particulars being furnished, justifying the penalty imposition.

Issue 4: Tribunal's Decision
After considering the rival contentions, the Tribunal analyzed the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and emphasized that making an incorrect claim did not automatically amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal noted that unless the details supplied in the return were found to be inaccurate, the penalty provision could not be invoked. The Tribunal held that the denial of the deduction under Section 80IA did not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars, as the claim was separate and based on legitimate grounds. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. to support its conclusion. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c).

Outcome:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, canceling the penalty of Rs. 2,55,53,890 levied under Section 271(1)(c) for the Assessment Year 2006-07.

---