Only paid members can access this page.
Buy this Document - Rs. 500/- only - or - Subscribe Annual Package
Renfro India (I) (P.) Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, 10(3) - 2012 (4) TMI 470 - ITAT MUMBAI - Income Tax
......... statement made or any detail supplied was found to be factually incorrect. Hence, at least, prima facie, the assessee cannot be held guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars. The words are plain and simple. In order to expose the assessee to the penalty unless the case is strictly covered by the provision, the penalty provision cannot be invoked. By any stretch of imagination, making an incorrect claim in law cannot tantamount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. Therefore, it is obvious that it must be shown that the conditions under s. 271(1) (c) must exist before the penalty is imposed. There can be no dispute that everything would depend upon the return filed because that is the only document, where the assessee can furnish the particulars of his income - CIT v. Atul Mohan Bindal 2009 225 CTR(SC) 248 2009 28 DTR (SC) 1 2009 9 SCC 589 followed . 10. Respectfully following the above orders, we allow the appeal filed by the appellant and reverse the order of the CIT(A).