Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 990 - HC - Income TaxLevy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - ITAT deleted the penalty - voluntary disclosure by the assessee to buy peace - additions were made on account of gift - assessee had not given details like name of the donor, mode of receipt, etc. - Additions towards unsecured loans - Additions were made on account of undisclosed rental income - Held that:- Under Section 271(1)(c) of the 1961 Act, the imposition of penalty is not automatic whenever there is less income returned. The pre-condition for imposition of penalty is subjective satisfaction of the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner, as the case may be, that the assessee has concealed particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. The furnishing of inaccurate particulars would have to be deliberate. In view of the explanation added, it cannot be said that the onus lies on the Revenue to establish mens rea in cases of concealment and/or short payment of tax. There is an onus on the assessee to show that there was no mens rea. Whether the assessee has been able to discharge the onus of establishing that there was no concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, would depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. The initiation of penal proceedings is not automatic and depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. In the case at hand, the learned Tribunal arrived at factual findings which ought not to be interfered with in an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. In this case, the learned Tribunal, as observed above, arrived at the finding that the claim to the expenditure towards brokerage/commission was bogus and in effect, held that imposition of penalty was justified. No question of law - Decided against the revenue.
|