Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 arose against an order related to proceedings under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act. The lower authorities held that the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income, claiming a loss of Rs. 7,88,200/- against an exact figure of Rs. 72,800/-.
Held
The Tribunal noted the discrepancy between the claimed loss and the actual figure, acknowledging the possibility of a clerical error. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to delete the penalty imposed.
Key Issues
Whether a discrepancy in claiming loss amounts to furnishing inaccurate particulars, justifying a penalty under Section 271C, or if it could be a clerical error.
Sections Cited
271C, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Sudhir Mohan Bansal, Vs ACIT, E-31, Sector-52, Circle-5(3)(1), Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201301 Noida (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAKPB9303K Assessee by: Sh. R. K. Gaur, CA Revenue by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 22.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 22.04.2025 ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061308087(1) dated 22.02.2024, in proceedings u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It transpires during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned lower authorities have held the assessee to have furnished inaccurate particulars of income; whilst claiming loss of Rs.7,88,200/- as against the exact figure amounting to Rs.72,800/- in question. That being the case, the tribunal is of the considered view that Sudhir Mohan Bansal going by the above twin figures, the possibility of a clerical error in disclosing the true figures could not all together ruled out. The impugned penalty stands deleted in very terms.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 22/04/2025.