Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income


Quick Summary
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has allowed an appeal filed by Samal Infra Projects P. Ltd., setting aside a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The tribunal found that the notice initiating the penalty proceedings was legally flawed as it did not specify whether the penalty was for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. Furthermore, the CIT(A) had modified the grounds for the penalty, indicating a lack of specificity from the Assessing Officer.

Court :
ITAT Delhi

Brief :
This appeals is filed by the assessee against the order dated 21/03/2018 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Noida for Assessment Year 2014-15.

Citation :
ITA No. 3239/DEL/2018 ( A.Y 2014-15)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI
BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 3239/DEL/2018 ( A.Y 2014-15)
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)
Samal Infra Projects P. Ltd.
F-47, Sector-Deleta-1, Greater
Noida, Greater Noida,
Uttar Pradesh
AANCS2375J
(APPELLANT)

vs

ITO
Ward-3(3)
Noida
Uttar Pradesh
(RESPONDENT)
Appellant by Ms. Shipra Walia, CA
Respondent by Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 14.10.2021
Date of Pronouncement 1.11.2021

ORDER

This appeals is filed by the assessee against the order dated 21/03/2018 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Noida for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2. The assessee company is engaged in the business of construction. For assessment year 2014-15, the Assessee filed its return of income showing taxable income of Rs. 11,95,010/- on November 19 2014. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has not paid statutory dues of service tax Rs 41,73,159/- till the due date of filing the return thereby attracting disallowance under Section 43B of the Act. However non-payment of statutory dues was pointed out at Sr. no. 26 of Form 3CD of Tax audit report as pointed out by the Assessee. Further an ad-hoc disallowance of Rs 10,000/- was also made to cover up the possible leakage in the books of accounts. Pursuant to proceedings under sub section 3 of section 143 of the Act for AY 2014-15, the Assessing Officer passed an assessment order dated 22nd December 2016 wherein a sum of Rs.42,73,159/- was added to fee computation of income. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under the Act on the grounds of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The penalty order was passed by the Assessing Officer on 06 June 06 2017 thereby imposing penalty of Rs 13,20,406 on the ground of concealment of income .

3. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. First of all, in the notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, there was no specific charges as relates to concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. From the notice dated 22/12/2016 produced by the Ld. AR during the hearing, it can be seen that the Assessing Officer was not sure under which limb of provisions of Section 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessee is liable for penalty.

4. Thus, notice under Section 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act itself is bad in law. Besides, this it can be seen from the order of the CIT(A) in last para no. 8 that the CIT(A) has modified the limb of the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act which shows that the Assessing Officer was not specific in the imposition of the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, by following the legal ratio set out in the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of SSA’S Emerald Meadows (supra), we, therefore, set-aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to cancel the penalty so levied. In result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 01st Day of November, 2021

Please find attached the enclosed file for the full judgement
 

FAQ :

The appeal concerned a penalty levied on Samal Infra Projects P. Ltd. under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for allegedly furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.

The Assessing Officer initially imposed a penalty on the grounds of concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, following an addition to the assessee's income due to non-payment of service tax.

The penalty was cancelled because the notice issued under Section 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act was considered 'bad in law' as it lacked specific charges regarding concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars.

Yes, the tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had modified the grounds for the penalty, which further demonstrated the lack of specificity by the Assessing Officer in the initial imposition.

The appeal was allowed, and the ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to cancel the penalty that had been levied on the assessee.

 

Comments




CCI Pro



Company
ARTICLESHIP 07 July 2026
Articleship

Jawahar and Associates Chartered Accountants

Hyderabad

CA Inter

View Details
Company
23 July 2026
CA Inter

Vikram Jadhav and Company

Pune

CA Inter

View Details
Company
06 July 2026
Senior Accountant

Arvindkumar Maniar & Co.

Rajkot

CA

View Details
Company
11 July 2026
CA semi qualified

Vakilsearch.com

Chennai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
22 July 2026
Senior Chartered Accountant

SKSS

Patna

CA

View Details
Company
31 July 2026
Senior Accountant - Bunia, Democratic Republic of Congo

AD GLOBAL LTD

Mumbai

B.Com

View Details
Company
21 July 2026
Chartered Accountant

Keshri & Associates

Thiruvananthapuram

CA

View Details
Company
Featured 16 July 2026
CA Inter, CA Intermediate, CA IPCC, CA CPT, CA SemiQualified

Vakilsearch.com

Chennai

CA Inter

View Details
Follow