← All Phrases

“furnishing inaccurate particulars of income”

PenaltySection 271(1)(c)Section 271(1)(c)1,616 judgments

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

Leading authorities on furnishing inaccurate particulars of income

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 of income

The Pandharpur Urban Co Op Bank Ltd, Pandharpur vs. ACIT, Kolhapur

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

ITA 1169/PUN/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36(1)(viii)

profits of the eligible business, also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by alleging that the appellant furnished inaccurate particulars of income. A show cause notice u/s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) was issued. In response to the show cause notice, it was submitted that the excess claim ... particulars furnished by the assessee only. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the appellant cannot be held to be guilty of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, therefore it is not a fit case for levy of penalty. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the penalty of Rs.38,95,262/-. Thus

M/S. Bankura District Central Co.Opetative Bank Ltd., Bankura vs. DCIT, Cir-3, Bankura.

In the result, ITA No. 1479/KOL/2023 is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1479/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250

under the head 'Special Reserve' has been disallowed and added back to total income. Penalty proceeding u/s.271(1)(c) is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income on this issue separately.” 6.1. Ld. A/R further pressed that the issue is duly accepted and so the amount is allowable expenses

M/S. Korada Furniture Company Pvt Ltd., Hubli vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1) &Tps, Hubli

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

ITA 47/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri.Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sandeep Kumar H.S., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

imposed on the assessee. 60. Clause (c) deals with two specific offences, that is to say, concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. No doubt, the facts of some cases may attract both the offences and in some cases there may be overlapping of the two offences ... course of any proceedings that there is concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of total income under clause (c). Concealment, furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are different. Thus, the Assessing Officer while issuing notice has to come to the conclusion that whether is it a case of concealment

Jet Lite (India) Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6 (Now CC-1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 839/DEL/2019[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2024AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmajet Lite (India) Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 13, Community Central Circle-6, Centre, Yusuf Sarai, (Now Cc-1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcs4480L

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT DR
Section 156Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

inaccurate particles of income. The AR argued that the AO has not made out a case as to how the appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or concealed particulars of income. 6.2 A perusal of the impugned order imposing penalty shows that in response to show cause notice dated ... that the AO has not made out a case as to how the appellant has concealed particular of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income, does not hold any water. The reply tendered by the appellant before the AO did not raise this point, at all. Even independently, as stated

Satyam Print House, Mumbai vs. Additional /Joint/ Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi

ITA 2898/MUM/2023[ 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2024

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Mahajan
Section 270ASection 50CSection 56(2)(x)

appellant agreed for addition, penalty u/s 270A should not be levied unless and until there is a concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 7. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessing officer has not questioned the actual sales consideration received by the appellant ... failed to appreciate that in the above circumstance, it does not amount to concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. It is also not the case of the revenue that the appellant has failed to 2 furnish the relevant record as called by the assessing officer to disclose

M/S Singh Construction Co., Patiala vs. ACIT, Circle, Patial

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1120/CHANDI/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vipen Sethi, Advocate and Shri Shashi Bhushan Galav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 263Section 68

account of undisclosed income. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are initiated for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” 10. Against the said findings and the order of the AO, the assessee moved in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein

M/S.Enrica Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1165/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 271ASection 274

under section 271(l)(c). 2. The learned Commissioner Of Income (Appeals)-20 ought to have seen that the appellant has neither furnished inaccurate particulars of income nor has concealed the particulars of income warranting levy of penalty under section 271(1)(C). 3. The learned CIT(A)-20 ought ... given facts and circumstances of the case. The assessee further submitted that it has neither concealed the particulars of income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of income, which is evident from the assessment order passed by the AO, where the AO has accepted explanations furnished by the assessee with regard

M/S Enrica Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1164/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Das

Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 271ASection 274

under section 271(l)(c). 2. The learned Commissioner Of Income (Appeals)-20 ought to have seen that the appellant has neither furnished inaccurate particulars of income nor has concealed the particulars of income warranting levy of penalty under section 271(1)(C). 3. The learned CIT(A)-20 ought ... given facts and circumstances of the case. The assessee further submitted that it has neither concealed the particulars of income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of income, which is evident from the assessment order passed by the AO, where the AO has accepted explanations furnished by the assessee with regard

ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 389/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

Revenue Receipt and accordingly computed the tax and also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income on both the issues viz (i) disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section ... that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only if the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or has offered an explanation which they can't substantiate, I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys

ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 388/AHD/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

Revenue Receipt and accordingly computed the tax and also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income on both the issues viz (i) disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section ... that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only if the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or has offered an explanation which they can't substantiate, I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys

ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 386/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

Revenue Receipt and accordingly computed the tax and also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income on both the issues viz (i) disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section ... that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only if the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or has offered an explanation which they can't substantiate, I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys

The ACIT(E), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Vadodara Urban Development Authority, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 379/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

Revenue Receipt and accordingly computed the tax and also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income on both the issues viz (i) disallowance of exemption claimed u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section ... that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only if the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income or has offered an explanation which they can't substantiate, I.T.A Nos. 388, 379,/Ahd/2023 and Ors. A.Ys

Shanno Mohammed Yusuf Warsi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-25(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal

ITA 1306/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Pankaj SoniFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 68Section 69C

Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated for furnishing the Act. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income with a view to concealment of income. inaccurate particulars of income with a view to concealment of income. inaccurate particulars of income with ... entire transaction of bogus LTCG. Penalty proceeding Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) is initi u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income ated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income with a view to concealment of income. with a view to concealment of income.” 3. Before

Sree Navaladian Finance, Namakkal vs. ITO, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1157/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

assessee challenged vide ground 4, for charge of penalty levied whether it is for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or for under reporting of income. The assessee before CIT(A) raised the following ground No.4:- “4. In the show cause notice dated ... considers as a statutory notice u/s.274, wherein the AO has failed to identify whether the proceeding was initiated for ‘concealment or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’. The ld.DR has submitted his comments as follows:- a) By just mention of the word ‘notice’ in a communication addressed, such communication would

Sree Navaladiyan Finance, Salem vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1156/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

assessee challenged vide ground 4, for charge of penalty levied whether it is for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or for under reporting of income. The assessee before CIT(A) raised the following ground No.4:- “4. In the show cause notice dated ... considers as a statutory notice u/s.274, wherein the AO has failed to identify whether the proceeding was initiated for ‘concealment or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’. The ld.DR has submitted his comments as follows:- a) By just mention of the word ‘notice’ in a communication addressed, such communication would

Sreenavaladian Finance, Salem vs. DCIT, Centralcircle, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1155/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

assessee challenged vide ground 4, for charge of penalty levied whether it is for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or for under reporting of income. The assessee before CIT(A) raised the following ground No.4:- “4. In the show cause notice dated ... considers as a statutory notice u/s.274, wherein the AO has failed to identify whether the proceeding was initiated for ‘concealment or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’. The ld.DR has submitted his comments as follows:- a) By just mention of the word ‘notice’ in a communication addressed, such communication would

Sree Navaladiyan Finance, Namakkal vs. DCIT, Cent Circle, Salem

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1154/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

assessee challenged vide ground 4, for charge of penalty levied whether it is for concealment of particulars of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or for under reporting of income. The assessee before CIT(A) raised the following ground No.4:- “4. In the show cause notice dated ... considers as a statutory notice u/s.274, wherein the AO has failed to identify whether the proceeding was initiated for ‘concealment or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income’. The ld.DR has submitted his comments as follows:- a) By just mention of the word ‘notice’ in a communication addressed, such communication would

Mahalinga Textiles, Theni vs. ITO, Ward-1, Theni

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

ITA 1296/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37

assessee has failed to submit any documentary evidence against the said claim. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) is hereby initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 4. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee is unable to submit proof of expenses

Sharad Bhaskarrao Gaikwad, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 917/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.917/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sharad Bhaskarrao Gaikwad, The Income Tax T.No.1, Vanai Apartment, V Officer, Gangapur Road, Behind S Nashik. Kulswamini Apart, Nashik – 422005. Pan: Adspg2339R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Miss Abhilasha Sanjay Pawar-Ca, Ar Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 02.05.2023 Emanating From Penalty Order Dated 17.02.2022 Passed Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Submission Of Ld.Ar : 2. The Ld.Authorised Representative(Ld.Ar) Of The Assessee Filed Written Submission. Vide Written Submission Ld.Ar Invited Our Sharad Bhaskarrao Gaikwad [A] Attention To The Notice Dated 24.03.2021 For A.Y. 2016-17 Issued By Assessing Officer(Ao) Which Was The First Notice With Reference To The Penalty. Ld.Ar In The Written Submission Explained That Nowhere In The Notice Section 271(1)(C) Is Mentioned. Nowhere In The Notice, The Assessing Officer Has Clarified, Whether It Is For Concealment Of Income Or For Filing Inaccurate Particulars.

Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

order was passed on 24//03/2021. In the Assessment Order the last sentence is as under : “Penalty Proceedings u/s271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are being initiated separately as detailed above. ” 4.2.2 Thus, the impugned Penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) was to be separately initiated ... under : 5. As can be observed in this final concluding paragraph the AO has levied penalty “for concealment of income and/or furnished inaccurate particulars of income”. Thus, this final concluding sentence explains that the AO was not sure whether he is levying penalty “for concealment of income or for filing

D.C.I.T Cir - 12, Kolkata vs. M/S Jkm Investment Pvt Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 380/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 271Section 274

income of the assessee company. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(l)(c) read with explanation 1 and section 274 are initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Total disallowance : Rs. 57,27,558/-“. 4. Dissatisfied with the order of ld. Assessing Officer, assessee carried the matter in appeal before