Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) not imposed for genuine, debatable PE interpretation without concealment or misrepresentation

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The ITAT held that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied merely because the assessee's interpretation of having no fixed place PE in India was not accepted, as the issue was debatable and pending before the High Court. The assessee had disclosed all relevant facts and acted on a bona fide belief supported by judicial precedents. Since penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings, and concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is not established, the penalty imposed for AY 2011-12 and subsequent years 2012-13 to 2016-17 was deleted. The AO was directed to rescind the penalty, affirming that a disputed legal question does not warrant penalty in absence of deliberate concealment or misrepresentation. The appeal was allowed accordingly.....