Section 271(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 271(1)(a) is Addl. CIT v. J.K. D'Costa (133 ITR 7), cited in 57 of the 50 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 271(1)(a)

Addl. CIT v. J.K. D'Costa
133 ITR 7 · 1982 · High Court
57
citing judgments

Debatable issues cannot be rectified under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, as rectification is limited to mistakes apparent from the record.

CIT v. KeshrimalParasmal
157 ITR 484 · 1986 · High Court
50
citing judgments

The revisional power of the Commissioner under section 263 can be exercised when the Assessing Officer has not initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) in the assessment order, and the CIT finds such omission to be erroneous.

ACIT v. Achal Kumar Jain
242 ITR 45 · 2000 · High Court
48
citing judgments

An assessment order is not considered erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue under Section 263 solely because the Assessing Officer failed to initiate penalty proceedings. The Commissioner cannot direct the initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 263, as they are distinct from assessment proceedings.

CIT v. C. R. K. Swami
173 ITR 510 · 1988 · High Court
45
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax cannot use their revisionary power under Section 263 to direct the initiation of penalty proceedings, as penalty proceedings are distinct and separate from assessment proceedings.

Aluminium Industries (P.) Ltd. v. CIT
80 Taxmann 184 · 1995 · High Court
38
citing judgments

Addition to the profit of an assessee cannot be made solely on the ground of low profits without a specific finding that the assessee's accounts are incorrect or incomplete. The Assessing Officer cannot dispute the assessee's method of accounting or claim a change in method without justification.

Addl. CIT v. Indian Pharmaceuticals
123 ITR 874 · 1980 · High Court
37
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) cannot direct the Assessing Officer (AO) to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) in exercise of revisional power under Section 263 of the Act, if the AO had not initiated such proceedings in the assessment order.

157 ITR 484/27 Taxman 447 (Raj.), Calcutta in CIT v. Linotype & Machinery Ltd.
192 ITR 337 · 1991 · High Court
36
citing judgments

When the Assessing Officer does not initiate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) in the assessment order, the Commissioner cannot direct the Assessing Officer to initiate them, as penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings.

(supra), CIT v. Sudershan Talkies
201 ITR 289 · 1993 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Revisionary powers under section 263 cannot be invoked solely to direct the initiation of penalty proceedings.

CIT v. ParmanandM.Patel
278 ITR 3 · 2005 · High Court
32
citing judgments

The Commissioner cannot revise an assessment order under section 263 solely to initiate penalty proceedings if the Assessing Officer's view was sustainable in law. A mere disagreement with the Assessing Officer's opinion does not render the assessment erroneous and prejudicial.

ACIT v. Achal Kumar Jain (1983) 142 ITR 606 (Delhi)and CIT v. Nihal Chand Rekyan
200 ITR 153 · 1993 · High Court
29
citing judgments

The Commissioner (CIT) cannot direct the Assessing Officer (AO) to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act while exercising revisional powers under Section 263, as penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings. The CIT cannot pass an order under Section 263 pertaining to penalty.

Judgments on Section 271(1)(a)