Tribunal upholds penalty for concealing interest income in revised tax return

The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on the assessee for concealing interest income from mutual funds in the revised return. The Tribunal determined that the assessee provided inaccurate particulars by claiming the interest income as exempt, leading to the penalty being upheld despite the assessee's argument of inadvertent error. The challenge to the validity of the penalty notice was dismissed as the assessee failed to raise the issue earlier, and the Tribunal emphasized the intentional misrepresentation in claiming the income as exempt, affirming the penalty.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) was sustainable where interest income from mutual funds was claimed as exempt in the revised return despite having been offered to tax in the original return. (ii) Whether the penalty notice was invalid for not specifying the exact charge under section 271(1)(c).

Issue (i): Whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) was sustainable where interest income from mutual funds was claimed as exempt in the revised return despite having been offered to tax in the original return.

Analysis: The revised return treated the interest receipt from mutual funds as exempt, although the original return had included the same amount for taxation. No valid basis was shown for the exemption claim. The failure to offer the receipt in the revised return resulted in inaccurate particulars in the return of income and, but for scrutiny, the amount would have escaped assessment.

Conclusion: Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was rightly sustained on this ground, against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the penalty notice was invalid for not specifying the exact charge under section 271(1)(c).

Analysis: The objection to the notice was not raised before the authorities below at the appropriate stage, and no prejudice was shown on account of the alleged omission in the notice. On that footing, the defect pleaded in the notice was not accepted as fatal.

Conclusion: The penalty notice was held to be valid, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars was maintained and the challenge to the notice failed, so the assessee's appeal did not succeed.

Ratio Decidendi: Furnishing a revised return with an untenable exemption claim for taxable income constitutes inaccurate particulars, and a belated challenge to the penalty notice will not vitiate the proceedings absent a timely plea of prejudice.

---