2019 (3) TMI 1162 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - claim of bad debt disallowed - disallowance has been deleted by the Tribunal itself - HELD THAT - Sub-clause (iii) of section 271(1)(c) provides mechanism for quantification of penalty. It contemplates that the assessee would be directed to pay a sum in addition to taxes, if any, payable him, which shall not be less than but which shall not exceed three times the amount of tax sought to be evaded by reason of concealment of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income - the quantification of the penalty is depended upon the addition made to the income of the assessee. Since in the present case, basis for visiting the assessee with penalty has been deleted by the Tribunal itself, the impugned penalty does not survive. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:

1. Appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Appeal against Penalty

The assessee appealed to the Tribunal against the penalty of ?13,29,742 imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The grievance was that the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the penalty in question. The case revolved around the disallowance of a bad debt amounting to ?50,06,147, which was the basis for the penalty imposed by the AO.

The counsel for the assessee argued that the Tribunal had previously deleted the disallowance of the bad debt in a separate order dated 20.6.2017. The Tribunal's order stated that the disallowed amount should be considered as a business loss and allowed as an adjustment while computing income under the head "income from business." The counsel highlighted that since the basis for the penalty had been nullified by the Tribunal's earlier decision, there was no justification for imposing the penalty under section 271(1)(c).

The Tribunal, after considering the arguments from both sides and reviewing the available material, observed that the quantification of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) is dependent on the additions made to the income of the assessee. As the basis for the penalty had been removed by the Tribunal's previous order, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty did not stand valid. Consequently, the Tribunal canceled the penalty and set aside the orders of the Revenue authorities passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, ruling in favor of canceling the penalty. The judgment was pronounced in the Open Court on 22nd March 2019.