2013 (1) TMI 878

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the order passed by CIT (A) of cancellation of the penalty to the tune of Rs. 3,31,200/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271 (1) (c) ?" 2. Heard learned counsel Ms. Paurami Sheth for the revenue and examined the material on record with her assistance. 3. The issue pertains to deletion of penalty imposed on account of disallowance of bad debts. It appears that the assessee disclosed all relevant material facts before the Assessing Officer at the time of filing of return. The Assessing Officer did not find such claim sustainable and imposed penalty on the assessee. The CIT(A) deleted such penalty and the Tribunal has rightly held in the finding that it is a case of difference of opinion in allowability of certain deductions and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the case of the Revenue either. However, the Learned Counsel for Revenue suggested that by making incorrect claim for the expenditure on interest, the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of the income. As per Law Lexicon, the meaning of the word "particular" is a detail or details (in plural sense); the details of a claim, or the separate items of an account. Therefore, the word "particulars" used in the Section 271(1)(c) would embrace the meaning of the details of the claim made. It is an admitted position in the present case that no information given in the Return was found to be incorrect or inaccurate. It is not as if any statement made or any detail supplied was found to be factually incorrect. Hence, at least, prima facie, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n, which are not accurate, not exact or correct, not according to truth or erroneous. We must hasten to add here that in this case, there is no finding that any details supplied by the assessee in its return were found to be incorrect or erroneous or false. Such not being the case, there would be no question of inviting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by itself, will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such claim made in the Return cannot amount to the inaccurate particulars. We do not agree, as the assessee had furnished all the details of its expenditure as well as income in its Return, which details, in ....