2019 (4) TMI 832 - AT - Income Tax

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition on account of surrender of sale amount of the assessee in place of returned income - HELD THAT - As decided in DEEPTY AGARWAL AND CHARU AGARWAL VERSUS ITO, WARD 1 (2) , MEERUT 2018 (9) TMI 709 - ITAT DELHI in the computation of income the assessee has duly disclosed all the particulars of her income and under the head Income with full exemption the assessee has claimed dividend income as exempt and also long term capital gain on which STT is paid which is also exempt from tax. As find that during the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings the AO has proceeded by the assumption that the shares purchased and sold by the assessee comes into the category of penny stock companies. AO has drawn support from outside information. The surrender of exemption by the assessee on repetitive queries would not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The assessee has claimed exemption as per the provisions of law, though surrendered during the course of assessment proceedings. No penalty is leviable u/s 271(1)(c) - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against the order confirming penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.

Analysis:
1. Issue of Penalty Imposition: The primary issue in this appeal was the imposition of a penalty of ?2,15,500 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessing Officer had completed the assessment for the year by making an addition on account of surrender of sale amount of the assessee, leading to the imposition of the penalty.

2. Confirmation of Penalty by CIT(A): Upon appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer in levying the penalty. The appellant contested this decision by citing a similar case where the Tribunal had ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the surrender of exemption during assessment proceedings did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.

3. Judicial Precedent: The appellant relied on the judgment in the case of Deepti Aggarwal vs. ITO, Charu Aggarwal vs. ITO, where the Tribunal had held that the surrender of exemption by the assessee on repetitive queries did not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal in that case had directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

4. Decision of the Tribunal: Considering the facts and the judicial precedent cited by the appellant, the Tribunal in the present case set aside the orders of the lower authorities and deleted the penalty of ?2,15,500 imposed on the assessee. The Tribunal concluded that, based on the precedent and the facts being identical, no penalty was leviable under section 271(1)(c) of the Act in this case.

5. Final Outcome: Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the penalty of ?2,15,500 was deleted. The Tribunal pronounced the order in the open court on 12/04/2019, ruling in favor of the assessee based on the judicial precedent and the interpretation of the provisions of the Income Tax Act regarding the imposition of penalties for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.