← All Phrases

“furnishing inaccurate particulars”

PenaltySection 271(1)(c)Section 271(1)(c)2,073 judgments

The decision most relied on for furnishing inaccurate particulars is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on furnishing inaccurate particulars

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows
73 Taxmann.com 248 · 2016 · Supreme Court
953
citing judgments

A notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether penalty proceedings are for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Such lack of specificity vitiates the penalty proceedings.

Ashok Pai v. CIT
292 ITR 11 · 2007 · Supreme Court
812
citing judgments

“Concealment of particulars of income” and “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” are two distinct offences under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. A penalty cannot be levied under one limb if the show cause notice or basis for penalty specifies the other, as this constitutes a complete variance in the reasons for assuming jurisdiction.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows
73 Taxmann.com 241 · 2016 · High Court
791
citing judgments

A penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty is for concealment of income or for furnishing incorrect particulars of income.

Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT
434 ITR 1 · 2021 · High Court
672
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify the exact charge by not striking off the irrelevant limb (concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income). Such an omnibus or vague notice renders the penalty proceedings bad in law, and any penalty imposed on its basis is liable to be quashed.

Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT
291 ITR 519 · 2007 · Supreme Court
565
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to strike out the inapplicable limb (concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars) from the standard proforma, indicating non-application of mind. The initial burden of proving concealment or inaccurate particulars rests on the Revenue.

CIT v. Kaushalya
216 ITR 660 · 1995 · High Court
511
citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is not invalidated by the Assessing Officer's failure to strike off irrelevant portions in the show cause notice, provided the assessee understood the exact charge and suffered no prejudice, indicating an application of mind by the AO.

Judgments citing furnishing inaccurate particulars

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 17/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay
Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

viib) of IT Act and taxed accordingly. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) of the IT Act are also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 1 Total income as per computation of income 0 2 Add: As discussed in Para 3,4,5 above 189641183 3 Total Income assessed

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 16/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.13 To 17/Pun/2024

Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

taxed accordingly. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) of the IT Act are also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 1 Total income as per computation of income 0 2 Add: As discussed in Para 3,4,5 above 189641183 3 Total Income assessed 189641183 Rounded

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 15/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay
Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

viib) of IT Act and taxed accordingly. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) of the IT Act are also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 1 Total income as per computation of income 0 2 Add: As discussed in Para 3,4,5 above 189641183 3 Total Income assessed

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 14/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay
Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

viib) of IT Act and taxed accordingly. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) of the IT Act are also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 1 Total income as per computation of income 0 2 Add: As discussed in Para 3,4,5 above 189641183 3 Total Income assessed

M/S Accord Mediplus Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Pune

ITA 13/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. Phadke and Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay
Section 1Section 147Section 56(2)

viib) of IT Act and taxed accordingly. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(C) of the IT Act are also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 1 Total income as per computation of income 0 2 Add: As discussed in Para 3,4,5 above 189641183 3 Total Income assessed

V.V. Mohammed, Kannur vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kannur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 862/COCH/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Apr 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Sureshkumar C, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR
Section 139(1)Section 139(2)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 22(1)Section 22(4)Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Thereafter on 30th March, 2012, the AO levied the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act on the ground that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the AO levying the penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee preferred ... under section 142(1)/143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 No dated *have concealed the particulars of your income or Furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. You are hereby requested to appear before me on 29/01/2010 at 3.30PM and show cause why an order imposing a penalty

Barminco Indian Underground Mining Services LLP, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-28(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2253/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआअसं.2253/िद"ी/2010(िन.व. 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-31(1), R. No. 1405, 14Th Floor, E-2 Block, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi बनाम Vs. Niranjan Koirala, 27, Akbar Road, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaupk-0483-B Assessee By : Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Department By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 23.05.2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 18.02.2010, For Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. This Appeal Was Decided By The Tribunal Vide Order Dated 20.07.2018. Thereafter, The Revenue Filed Miscellaneous Application Seeking Rectification In The Order Of Tribunal On The Ground That The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Vide Application Dated 13.08.2014 Remained To Be Decided. The Tribunal In Ma No. 732/Del/2018 Vide Order Dated 10.07.2023 Recalled The Order

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 54F

income of the assessee from 'long term capital gains'. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)© of the I.T.Act, 1961 are being initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” 7. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The First Appellate Authority accepted

Shashi Gupta, Madho Singh Circle vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 498/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Vikash Rajvanshi, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT- DR a
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 270ASection 57

assessee in her return of income tax. Ld. A.O. has also initiated penalty proceeding under section 270A of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of Income despite facts that interest disallowed by A.O. is duly disclosed in return of income filed by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved from the order

Ismailbhai Savdibhai Hira, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 207/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

Section 132Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69

further submitted that the Assessing Officer imposed penalty for ‘concealment of income’. Therefore, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has never furnished inaccurate particulars or concealed any income as the assessee has filed the return of income declaring total income u/s. 153C of the Act. The addition itself categorically mentions ... inaccurate particulars of income’. In the assessment order, in paragraph No.6, it has only initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 for ‘furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’; and when the notice u/s 274 r.w.s. u/s 271(1)(c) has been issued, the same was for ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars

Ismailbhai Savdibhai Hira, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 206/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

Section 132Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69

further submitted that the Assessing Officer imposed penalty for ‘concealment of income’. Therefore, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has never furnished inaccurate particulars or concealed any income as the assessee has filed the return of income declaring total income u/s. 153C of the Act. The addition itself categorically mentions ... inaccurate particulars of income’. In the assessment order, in paragraph No.6, it has only initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 for ‘furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’; and when the notice u/s 274 r.w.s. u/s 271(1)(c) has been issued, the same was for ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars

Ismailbhai Savdibhai Hira, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 205/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

Section 132Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69

further submitted that the Assessing Officer imposed penalty for ‘concealment of income’. Therefore, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has never furnished inaccurate particulars or concealed any income as the assessee has filed the return of income declaring total income u/s. 153C of the Act. The addition itself categorically mentions ... inaccurate particulars of income’. In the assessment order, in paragraph No.6, it has only initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 for ‘furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’; and when the notice u/s 274 r.w.s. u/s 271(1)(c) has been issued, the same was for ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars

Ismailbhai Savdibhai Hira, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 204/AHD/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

Section 132Section 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69

further submitted that the Assessing Officer imposed penalty for ‘concealment of income’. Therefore, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has never furnished inaccurate particulars or concealed any income as the assessee has filed the return of income declaring total income u/s. 153C of the Act. The addition itself categorically mentions ... inaccurate particulars of income’. In the assessment order, in paragraph No.6, it has only initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 for ‘furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’; and when the notice u/s 274 r.w.s. u/s 271(1)(c) has been issued, the same was for ‘furnishing of inaccurate particulars

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Centeral Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 439/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector 17, Koperkhairne, Maharashtra-400709 V/S. बनाम Ito Central Circle 5(2) Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment ... penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 438/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector 17, Koperkhairne, Maharashtra-400709 V/S. बनाम Ito Central Circle 5(2) Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment ... penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 437/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17)

For Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment ... penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Centeral Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 436/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani V/S. Ito Central Circle 5(2) Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 17, Koperkhairne, Kurla Complex, Bandra Maharashtra-400709 East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment ... penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 435/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani V/S. Ito Central Circle 5(2) Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 17, Koperkhairne, Kurla Complex, Bandra Maharashtra-400709 East, Maharashtra-400051 बनाम स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment ... penalty once again by not identifying one of the two offences and instead levy penalty for allegedly concealing the particulars of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, xviii. in initiating penalty proceedings without recording his satisfaction in the assessment order or in notice that the facts recorded in assessment

Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT(It)-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5677/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

directions of the DRP considering the smallness of the amount. 4. The AO subsequently initiated penalty proceedings mentioning that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars in the return of income under section 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act. The assessee submitted that there is no concealment of income ... that as per the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act the assessee should have concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars and in assessee's case both these conditions are not satisfied. The ld. AR also submitted that it is a settled legal position that

Connerstone Ondemand Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation )-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3753/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

directions of the DRP considering the smallness of the amount. 4. The AO subsequently initiated penalty proceedings mentioning that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars in the return of income under section 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act. The assessee submitted that there is no concealment of income ... that as per the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act the assessee should have concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars and in assessee's case both these conditions are not satisfied. The ld. AR also submitted that it is a settled legal position that

Cornerstone Ondemand Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation )-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3752/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Hiten Thakkar, AR
Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

directions of the DRP considering the smallness of the amount. 4. The AO subsequently initiated penalty proceedings mentioning that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars in the return of income under section 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act. The assessee submitted that there is no concealment of income ... that as per the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act the assessee should have concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars and in assessee's case both these conditions are not satisfied. The ld. AR also submitted that it is a settled legal position that