2016 (8) TMI 103 - HC - Income Tax

Penalty levied under Section 271 (1)(c) - Held that - It is self evident that the issue in question was highly debatable one to various judicial forums giving different interpretations. Assessee having supplied all the primary facts cannot be held to have concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income - Decided in favour of the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to ITAT order confirming CIT (A) order regarding calculation of book profit under Section 115JA and penalty under Section 271(1)(c).

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the ITAT order confirming the CIT (A) order regarding the calculation of book profit under Section 115JA. The AO reworked the book profit due to misinterpretation by the assessee, leading to additions for provisions for doubtful debts. The CIT (A) determined the book profit differently, and the Tribunal dismissed the appeal upholding the CIT (A) order.

2. The substantial question of law raised was whether the Tribunal was correct in reversing the CIT (A) order and canceling the penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The appellant contended that penalty proceedings were rightly initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and concealing income. However, the Court found no error in the authorities' decisions.

3. The CIT (A) held that the matter involved legal interpretation with various conflicting court decisions. The Tribunal agreed that the issue was debatable, and since the assessee provided all primary facts, there was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was deleted.

4. The Court concurred with the CIT (A) and Tribunal's findings, upholding the deletion of the penalty. The Court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Department. The decision highlighted the importance of legal interpretation in tax matters and the absence of concealment or inaccurate particulars in the case.