Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed as the assessee did not make ...

Incorrect claim doesn't amount to inaccurate particulars. Separate books, own capital investments & direct expenses debited. No concealment. No Penalty.

Case Laws Income Tax

July 13, 2024

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed as the assessee did not make disallowance u/s 14A or compute income for administrative/indirect common expenses incurred in relation to earning exempt income. The court held that making an incorrect claim in law cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The assessee maintained separate books, investments were from own capital, interest payments were for business, and direct expenditure for exempt income was debited to personal accounts. No information in the return was found incorrect or inaccurate. The case was covered by the Supreme Court's judgment in CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products (P.) Ltd. and ITAT Delhi's decision in M/s. Mohair Investment and Trading Company (P.) Ltd., where the issue was debatable and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not sustainable. The revenue failed to show that the assessee concealed or furnished incorrect particulars of income.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed as the assessee did not make ...

Incorrect claim doesn't amount to inaccurate particulars. Separate books, own capital investments & direct expenses debited. No concealment. No Penalty.

Case Laws Income Tax

July 13, 2024

You may also like:

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition made on account of mistake in treating the income from transfer of depreciable asset as long-term capital gain instead of short term...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Making an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Mere making of a...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - addition on account of addition under the head “Land Compensation and Rehabilitation Expenses” - mere making of the claim, which is not...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Whether 'mens rea' or deliberate attempt is not essential for levy of penalty - A mere making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law, by...

The ITAT Mumbai considered a case involving a penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal found the...

Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - disallowance made u/s. 35(2AB) - The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Defective notice u/s 274 - non specification of charge - AO has miserably failed to specify in the notice issued under section 274 read with...

Denial of Exemption u/s. 11 - non maintaining of separate ledger accounts - assessee is maintaining separate ledger for earning this income and also maintaining separate...

Levying penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The appellant, a partner in a partnership firm, had disclosed all particulars of income, including remuneration and interest on capitals...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed despite the assessee withdrawing the exemption claim u/s 10(38) for Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of penny stocks and offering...

Mere erroneous claim in the absence of any concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is not a ground for levying penalty especially when there is nothing on...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - not entitled for the deduction U/s 54 - claim deduction allowed U/s 54F - once, the assessee has explained the reasons for making a wrong claim...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - capital gain have been directly credited to capital reserve account in the balance-sheet, whereas as per the AO such capital gain should have...

Deduction claimed u/s. 54 - delay in depositing unutilized amount in capital gains account deposit scheme - Assessee has explained reasons for depositing unutilized...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - advance written off - business or capital loss - genuineness of loss is not in dispute - in the assessment order there is no mention about...

Quick Updates: