“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

DCIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2344/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 28

being made to the total income of the assesse. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars are initiated separately. 5.1.3 Further, during the assessment proceedings, it is also noted that has claimed depreciation under "Oil and Gas division" in respect of KG-D6 basin/Block

Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 1645/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 28

Oriental Fabritech Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy.C.I.T.13(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1425/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं.1425/मुं/2021 िन.व.2009-10) Orient Fabritech Pvt. Ltd. C/So D.C.Bothra & Co. Llp (Ca), (Formerly Known As D.C. Bothra & Co.), 297, Tardeo Road, Willie Mansion, 1St Floor, Opp. Bank Of India, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007. Pan: Aaaco8702A ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Ito, Range- 1(2)(4), Room No. 537, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajkumar Singh. "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. R. A. Dhyani, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/03/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, J.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) (In Short

For Appellant: Sh. Rajkumar SinghFor Respondent: Sh. R. A. Dhyani, Sr. DR

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Apex Court in the case of T. Ashok Pai Vs. CIT 292 ITR 11 has held the concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income carry different connotations. Thus, the AO is duty bound to clearly convey to the assessee the limb for which penalty is to be levied

New India Roadways & Sunrise Stone Industries (Jv), Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (2) (4), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6830/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Section 271Section 69C

unexplained expenditure. Penalty u/s. 271(l)(c) of the I .Tax Act is initiated separately for concealment of income and for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 4. Against the above order assessee appealed before learned CIT(A). Learned CIT(A) concluded as under :- From the above it is clear that

Everest Kanto Cylinder Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asstt. CIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai

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

ITA 764/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Bagchi

Section 115JSection 26ASection 271(1)(c)

differential amount of Rs.30,82,223/- is added to the total income of teh assessee. Penalty u/s.271(1)(c) are separately initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 5. The said amount of Rs.30,82,223/- was also added by the Assessing Officer in the book profit of the assessee

Sankalp Retail Value Stores Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 13(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2426/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2426/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Sankalp Retail Value Stores बिधम/ Acit-13(2)(1) Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai- Vs. 401, Rajiv Premji Apts., S.V. 400020. Road, Borivali (W), Mumbai-400092. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapc5897R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Hoshang Boman Irani (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, (Jm): The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 29.12.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2008-09 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Ordered To Be Confirmed. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang Boman Irani (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

course of any proceedings under the Act, he is satisfied that any person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. In other words, what Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act postulates is that the penalty can be levied on the existence ... situations, namely, for concealing the particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, it is obvious from the phraseology of Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act that the imposition of penalty is invited only when the conditions prescribed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act exist

Sudha Naren Seth, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(3)(3) (Erstwhile ITO, 11(3)(3)), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5671/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

disputed. 3.1. Later penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated by the ld. AO in the assessment order for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and thereby concealing the income. Penalty notice u/s.274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 28/03/2014 is placed on record wherein ... assessing officer himself was not sure whether he had proceeded on the basis that the assessee had concealed his income or he had furnished inaccurate particulars. 188. We may, in this context, respectfully observe that a contravention of a mandatory condition or requirement for a communication to be valid communication

M/S. Chemstar Organics (India) Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1(1), Baroda

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2493/AHD/2014[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 2493 & 2494/Ahd/2014 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 1998-99 & 2010-11) बिधम/ M/S. Chemstar Organics (India) Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Ltd. Baroda. Vs. 4Th Floor, Pnb House, Sir P. M. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc9210F (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satish Modi Revenue By: Shri Mehul Jain (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -01, Baroda [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 1998-99 & 2010-11. Ita. No.2493/Ahd/2014 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 09.06.2014 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -01, Baroda [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.1998-99 Wherein The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Ordered To Be Confirmed. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Satish ModiFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain (Sr. AR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271

course of any proceedings under the Act, he is satisfied that any person has concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. In other words, what Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act postulates is that the penalty can be levied on the existence ... situations, namely, for concealing the particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, it is obvious A.Ys.1998-99 & 2010-11 from the phraseology of Sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act that the imposition of penalty is invited only when the conditions prescribed

DCIT 10 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Maharashtra Electronic Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 8051/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – 10(2)(2) V. M/S. Maharashtra Electronics Room No. 216-A Corporation Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Plot No. Am-3, Midc Cross Road “A” Marol Industrial Area, Andheri (E) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400093 Pan: Aaacm4980A (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri R.C. Jain Assessee By : Department By : Shri Achal Sharma

For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 57

assessment order. Simultaneously, penalty proceedings were initiated by issue and service of notice u/s. 274 r.w.s 271(1)(c) dated 12.12.2013 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. However, there was no compliance from the assessee’s end in this regard. Against the assessment order, assessee filed appeal before ... opinion that the appellant cannot be considered to be in default u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act concealment or for furnishing inaccurate particulars and cannot be visited with penalty. - Accordingly the penalty of 6,64,76,192/- levied u/s. 271(1)(c) is directed to be deleted.” 5. Aggrieved

Rakesh Kumar Pawa, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-18, New Delhi

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

ITA 8059/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2009-10 Rakesh Kumar Pawa, Vs Acit, E-21,Park Lane, Circle-18, Kalindi Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Agrpp6439R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Mathur, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

while recording his satisfaction, has mentioned that “satisfaction is hereby recorded that the assessee has concealed the particulars of income or has furnished inaccurate particulars of income.” He accordingly submitted that both at the time of recording his satisfaction as well as at the time of issuing penalty notice ... said decision has held that a mere making of the claim which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the income of the assessee. Such claim made in the return cannot amount to the inaccurate particulars. Relying on various other decisions

M/S. Tejas Networks Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 582/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

facts and circumstance of the case by initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and concealment of income. 15.2. The learned AO ought to have appreciated that penalty under section 271(1)(iii) of the Act for concealment of income ... furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is determined based on the "amount of tax sought to be evaded", which would be "Nil" in the present case as the income of the assessee has been finally assessed under the provisions of Minimum Alternate Tax of the Act, whereas adjustments have been made

M/S Tejats Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1674/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 694/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 621/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 468/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 296/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1119/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

ACIT Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6971/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 153ASection 271(1)

returned contradictory findings, which do not support the inference that the assessee either concealed the particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof, and if the explanation of the assessee is more consistent as supported by the evidence of the entities from which the assessee said to have purchased ... under law. 4. Learned Assessing Officer found that the difference taken by the assessee was not tenable and the assessee was guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and therefore liable to penalty under section 271(1)( c ) of the Act. On this premise, learned Assessing Officer proceeded further

Addl.CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi vs. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

ITA 209/DEL/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2002-03

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

Court. 6. In the backdrop of the aforesaid undisputed facts, the sole question arises for determination is: “as to whether assessee company has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or has concealed particulars of its income during the course of assessment proceedings so as to attract penal provisions contained under Section ... basis of its audited financials have been rejected by the lower authorities while taking different view than the assessee, no question of furnishing inaccurate particulars arises. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has dealt with this identical issue in favour of the assessee in case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts

Dsv Solution P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/Asstt/CIT/ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 922/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledvs Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs. Additional/Joint/ A-203, The Qube, Cts Assistant No. 1489, Mv Road, Commissioner Of Marol, Andheri East, Income Tax, National Mumbai – 400059. E- Assessment Centre, Delhi. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu5306L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Karishmaprataphekar.Ar Respondent By : Dr.Yogesh Kamat. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 24.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Ms.KarishmaPrataphekar.ARFor Respondent: Dr.Yogesh Kamat. CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92C(1)

learned AO / learned TPO have erred in initiating penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income on adjustments made in the draft assessment order. The Appellant prays that the disallowance made by the learned AO / TPO and upheld by the learned