2015 (12) TMI 1033 - HC - Income Tax

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) - Held that - The return filed by the assessee was a non est return. Even no explanation was furnished by the assessee to substantiate the claim of not filing the return voluntarily. The Tribunal observed that the case of the assessee fell under main provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act as there was definite concealment in the facts and circumstances and, therefore, reference to Explanation 3 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for deleting the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by the CIT was unjustified. The Tribunal had rightly concluded that there was clear concealment of income under the main provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and reference to Explanation 3 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by the CIT(A) was unwarranted. Learned counsel for the assessee was unable to demonstrate that either the approach of the Tribunal was erroneous or perverse in any manner or that the findings of concealment recorded by the Tribunal are based on misreading or misappreciation of evidence or material on record which may warrant interference by this Court. - Decided against assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in refiling the appeal.
2. Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against ITAT order.
3. Substantial questions of law raised by the appellant.
4. Assessment details and penalty proceedings.
5. Justification of penalty imposition under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

Analysis:
1. The High Court condoned a 4-day delay in refiling the appeal.
2. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act against the ITAT order for the assessment year 2007-08. The appellant raised substantial questions of law regarding the applicability of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, bonafide belief in tax exemption, interpretation of penalty provisions, consideration of agreement to sell, and tax deposit before notice under Section 148 IT Act, 1961.
3. The facts revealed that the appellant introduced sale proceeds in her capital account without paying capital gains tax, leading to penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The CIT(A) initially deleted the penalty, but the Tribunal reinstated it, justifying that the appellant furnished inaccurate particulars of income.
4. The Tribunal found that the appellant's return was a non est return, not voluntary, and upheld the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant concealed income, and the CIT(A)'s reference to Explanation 3 was incorrect. The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s order and reinstated the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer.
5. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that no substantial question of law arose. The Court found no errors in the Tribunal's approach or findings of concealment, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The High Court affirmed the penalty imposition under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, as justified by the Tribunal's decision.