Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 865 - AT - Income TaxPenalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) - AO has nowhere specified that the penalty was either for concealment of income or for filing inaccurate particulars of income - HELD THAT:- We find that in the assessment order for all the three years the penalty has been initiated for concealment of income whereas in the notices issued for all the three years, penalty has been initiated for concealing the particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of the income. In the penalty order the AO has held the assessee was liable for penalty for concealing its income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income. Thus, it is evident that the Assessing Officer is not certain on the charges the penalty has been levied whether it is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The dictionary meaning of the word ‘conceal’ is ‘to hide, withdraw or remove from observation’; ‘cover or keep from sight’; ‘to avoid disclosing or divulging’. Thus, concealment of ‘particular of income’ means non-disclosure of particulars of income. On the other hand, where particulars are disclosed but such disclosure is not correct, true or accurate, it would amount to ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income’. Thus, the two changes of levy of penalty are different. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory [2013 (7) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has cancelled the penalty where the Assessing Officer failed to strike out the specific reason of levy of penalty in the notice issued. In the case SSA Emerald Meadows [2016 (8) TMI 1145 - SC ORDER] has also cancelled the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in absence of charges of levy not clear in the notice issued. Hon’ble High Court recently in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. M/s. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd., [2019 (8) TMI 409 - DELHI HIGH COURT] following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. SSA Emerald Meadows (supra) confirmed cancellation of penalty. Set aside and the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in all the three assessment years are cancelled - Decided in favour of assessee.
|