9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: The judgment involves the confirmation of penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, where the key issue is whether the penalty was imposed for concealing particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
ITAT AHMEDABAD Judgment Summary: Issue 1: Confirmation of Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act The appeals were directed against orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for different assessment years, consolidated for hearing due to a common issue. The penalty was imposed in the course of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, related to commission payments. The penalty order did not specify whether it was for concealing income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Appellant argued that penalty proceedings are quasi-criminal and require clear findings, citing relevant case law. The authorities below did not provide a clear finding on concealment or inaccurate particulars. Relying on precedents, the appeal was allowed, directing deletion of the penalty. Issue 2: Similarity in Facts and Decision In a separate appeal with identical facts, following the decision in the first appeal, the penalty was also directed to be deleted. Both appeals were allowed, and the penalties were set aside. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal allowed both appeals, directing the deletion of penalties imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. This summary provides a detailed overview of the issues involved in the judgment, the arguments presented, and the final decision rendered by the Appellate Tribunal in relation to the confirmation of penalties under the Income Tax Act.
|
