TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 592
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resent for the assessee, as registered notices sent for 23/06/2016 and 01/08/2016 were neither responded by the assessee nor any adjournment was sought. It seems that the assessee is not interested to pursue its appeal, therefore, I have no option but to proceed ex-parte, qua the assessee and tend to dispose of this appeal on the basis of material available on record. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri Sumit Kumar defended the penalty. 2.1. I have considered the submissions of ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee company claimed deduction u/s 80IB of the Act amounting to Rs. 38, 93,297/-. The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed on 01/01/2013 assessing the total income at Rs. 39,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of section 271(1)(C) of the Act for ready reference and analysis:- Section 271(1)(c) is as under:- "271(1) If the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner in the course of any proceedings under this Act, is satisfied that any person- (c) has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income." 2.5. A glance at this provision would suggest that in order to be covered, there has to be concealment of the particulars of the income of the assessee. Secondly, the assessee must have furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. Present is not the case of concealment of the income. That is not the case of the Revenue either. As per Law Lexicon, the meaning of the word....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 271(1)(c), conditions stated therein must exist." Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under Section 271(1)(c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the Return filed because that is the only document, where the assessee can furnish the particulars of his income. When such particulars are found to be inaccurate, the liability would arise. In Dilip N. Shroff Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai & Anr. [2007(6) SCC 329], Hon'ble Court explained the terms "concealment of income" and "furnishing inaccurate particulars". The Court went on to hold therein that in order to attract the penalty under Section 271(1)(c), mens rea was necessary, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dicated the element of strict liability on the assessee for the concealment or for giving inaccurate particulars while filing Return, there was no necessity of mens rea. The Court went on to hold that the objective behind enactment of Section 271(1)(c) read with Explanations indicated with the said Section was for providing remedy for loss of revenue and such a penalty was a civil liability and, therefore, willful concealment is not an essential ingredient for attracting civil liability as was the case in the matter of prosecution under Section 276-C of the Act. The basic reason why decision in Dilip N. Shroff Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai & Anr. (cited supra) was overruled by Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Dhar....