Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (1) TMI 811 - HC - Income TaxPenalty under Section 271(1)(c) - assessee has not voluntarily withdrawn the benefit claimed u/s 54F but has revised the computation only after he has been cornered in the scrutiny proceedings and that too after one and a half year of the scrutiny proceedings - Held that:- Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) may be imposed either if the assessee had concealed the particulars of his income or it had furnished inaccurate particulars of it's income. In case the assessing officer alleged 'concealment' of such particulars it would have to be alleged and established as a fact that the assessee did something so as to hide or not disclose such particulars. Similarly, in case the assessing officer alleged furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income he would have to establish which particulars of income furnished was/were inaccurate as may have had a material bearing on determination/assessment of the true income of the assessee. Therefore, we are unable to accept the argument advanced by learned counsel for the assessee that the two charges that may invite a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act can never co-exist. It is too broad a proposition to merit acceptance or rejection in the facts of the present case. No independent reasoning has been recorded by the assessing authority to conclude that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. At the same time, finding as to concealment of particulars of income was duly supported with reasoning (as extracted above). Tribunal has erred in setting aside the entire penalty order. It should have examined the other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee including the ground that mere rejection of a claim or withdrawal of a claim did not amount to evidence or proof of concealment. We find that the Tribunal has not adjudicated the challenge raised by the assessee to the imposition of penalty for concealment, on merits. Assessing officer having imposed penalty for concealment of particulars of income upon reasoning given by him, the said order could not have been set aside in entirety merely because the assessing officer, in the later part of the penalty order also mentioned that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. The appeal is allowed. However, in view of the fact that the Tribunal has not recorded any finding on the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee whether as a fact the assessee had concealed particulars of his income, the matter is remitted to the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh on that issue. It is requested to the Tribunal to proceed to hear and decide that issue in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
|