Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 495 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURTPenalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Held that:- The respondent had disclosed the assets under consideration, and the interest income accruing on fixed deposit receipts, in its books of accounts - The Tribunal has held that explanation proferred by the assessee that they were advised to directly credit interest in the name of the partners, which was later found to be legally impermissible, is logical and, therefore, does not attract penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act or fall within the mischief of furnishing incorrect particulars or concealment of income, so as to invite a penalty - Following CIT versus Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] - It is not every infraction or denial of claim for deduction or exemption that invites penalty - A penalty would follow only where inaccurate particulars have been furnished with mens rea to evade tax - An assessee is entitled, by provisions of the Act, to claim deductions or exemptions and to present his income in such a manner as he may deem beneficial to his business/interest - Where an assesse has exercised a bona fide right but the deductions or exemptions so claimed are found to be incorrect, penalty would follow only if the claim is raised with intent to furnish incorrect particulars and to evade tax – Decided against Revenue.
|