Appeal allowed as Tribunal finds appellant rectified error in good faith, penalty unjustified

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was not justified. The Tribunal found that the appellant rectified the computation error in good faith and without any intention to provide inaccurate particulars of income. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the penalty was directed to be deleted as upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The appellant challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arising from discrepancies in long-term capital loss claimed in the return of income for the assessment year 2015-16. The appellant initially claimed a long-term capital loss of Rs. 7,36,071 on the sale of a residential property, which was later revised to Rs. 1,10,174 during assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer levied a penalty of Rs. 1,28,934, alleging willful attempt to defraud the Revenue by not disclosing the true income. The appellant contended that the revised computation was made in good faith after discrepancies were pointed out, and there was no impact on the taxable income for the year. The appellant argued that there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Departmental Representative, however, supported the penalty citing improper disclosure of long-term capital loss.

The Tribunal analyzed the case, noting that the appellant rectified the computation of long-term capital loss upon identification of discrepancies during assessment proceedings. It was observed that the revised computation did not affect the taxable income for the relevant year, as only the loss claimed in the return was reduced and carried forward for set-off in future years. The Tribunal found that the appellant rectified the mistake in good faith and without disputing the computation of long-term capital loss. Referring to a previous case, the Tribunal highlighted that the term "inaccurate particulars of income" requires a conscious element of furnishing incorrect details in the return, coupled with circumstantial evidence. The Tribunal concluded that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified in the present case, as there was no intention to provide inaccurate particulars of income. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty as upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was not warranted in the circumstances of the case. The appellant's appeal was allowed, and the penalty was directed to be deleted.

---