2022 (3) TMI 1276 - AT - Income Tax

Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - disallowance of 100% of the expenses claimed by the assessee which was restricted to 50% on the reasoning that the other associated/sister concern of the assessee also availed the benefit of research and development activity carried out by the assessee - HELD THAT - As decided in own case 2021 (12) TMI 1320 - ITAT AHMEDABAD as regards the main provisions of section 271(1)(c) we find that the genuineness of the expenses were not doubted by CIT (A). As only alleged that the associated concern /sister concern have availed the benefit of the expenditures incurred by the assessee out of research and development activity - The entire expenses cannot be allowed as deduction to the assessee. As per the learned CIT (A) the impugned expenses should also be allocated to the other units of the assessee group concern which availed the benefit of research and development activity carried out by it. There was no doubt raised by the authorities below as far as genuineness of the expenses is concern. Undeniably research and development facility maintained by the assessee was approved by DSIR. What was doubted the quantum of the expenses by the learned CIT (A) which has led to the present penalty proceedings. Claim of the assessee at the most can be regarded as inaccurate claim which cannot be equated with the inaccurate particulars of income. It is for the reason that nothing has been brought on record by the authorities below suggesting that the assessee has furnished the particulars of income with dishonest intent. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against order restricting penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to 50% of addition.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) restricting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to 50% of the addition made during the assessment year 2006-07.

2. The assessee, a private limited company engaged in trading, had filed its return of income declaring a loss. The Assessing Officer disallowed a significant sum in respect of R&D expenses. The issue was taken to the Tribunal, which set it aside for fresh consideration. The Commissioner observed that the R&D benefits were utilized by group concerns, not exclusively by the assessee. Consequently, only 50% of the R&D expenditure was allowed as business expenditure under section 37(1).

3. In penalty proceedings, the Commissioner reduced the penalty amount to 50% based on the above decision. The assessee appealed against this penalty order to the Tribunal.

4. The assessee's counsel cited a previous ITAT decision in the assessee's favor for the assessment year 2005-06, where 50% of the penalty was also deleted. The Tribunal considered this decision and the facts of the case, ultimately deciding in favor of the assessee and canceling the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

5. The Tribunal referred to the previous decision's operative portion, emphasizing the need for inaccurate particulars of income to invoke penalty provisions. The Tribunal analyzed the definition of "inaccurate particulars" and the requirements for invoking penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

6. The Tribunal found that the claim of the assessee, though disputed, did not indicate dishonest intent or concealment of income. The genuineness of expenses was not questioned, and there was no evidence of false explanation or lack of substantiation. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty provisions were not attracted in this case, and the penalty was canceled in favor of the assessee.

7. Based on the Co-ordinate Bench's decision for the assessment year 2005-06 and the analysis of the facts, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and canceled the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

8. The Tribunal pronounced the order in favor of the assessee, canceling the penalty on 25th March 2022 at Ahmedabad.