Disclosure of primary facts defeats concealment penalty when the dispute is only over the head of income.

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is not attracted where the assessee has disclosed all primary facts relating to purchase, sale, payment, receipt and resulting profit, and the dispute is only over the correct head of income. A mere change in characterisation of the disclosed income, or rejection of the assessee's legal claim, does not by itself amount to concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. On these facts, the addition arose from the Assessing Officer's treatment of the transaction under a different head, not from suppression of the transaction itself, so the concealment penalty was deleted.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was leviable where the assessee had disclosed the purchase and sale of shares and offered the gain as capital gains, but the assessment was ultimately made under a different head.

Analysis: The assessee had disclosed the material particulars relating to purchase, sale, payment and receipt, and the profit arising from the transaction. The disputed addition arose from the Assessing Officer's treatment of the income under a different head and not from any finding that the transaction itself was suppressed. On these facts, the case fell within the principle that where all primary facts are disclosed, mere rejection of the assessee's legal claim or change of head of income does not by itself establish concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

Conclusion: Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable and was deleted.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty for concealment cannot be imposed when the assessee has disclosed all primary facts and the dispute relates only to the characterisation or assessment of the disclosed income.

---