Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act
The decision most relied on for Section 271AAB is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 of the 797 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.
Leading authorities on Section 271AAB
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.
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.
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.
Minor defects or mistakes in a penalty notice issued under Section 274 do not invalidate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) if the assessee suffers no prejudice and is aware of the charge. However, significant vagueness or ambiguity that demonstrates non-application of mind or causes prejudice can still render the notice invalid.
Mens rea is a necessary ingredient to attract penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, as 'inaccurate' signifies a deliberate act or omission by the assessee. Clause (iii) of Section 271(1) grants discretionary jurisdiction to the assessing authority regarding penalty amounts.
An adverse inference cannot be drawn against an assessee based on a document found with a third party during a search, as possession is only attributable to the searched person. An addition to income based solely on an undated, unsigned seized document, without further corroborative evidence or inquiry, is not sustainable.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied solely on the basis of findings in the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer must discharge the burden of proving concealment or inaccurate particulars with additional material.
An assessee's agreement to an addition or voluntary disclosure of income does not automatically establish concealment for levying penalty under Section 271(1)(c). While such agreement may arise from various reasons like avoiding litigation, the assessee must still discharge the burden of proving that the addition was not due to concealment.
Penalty under section 271AAB cannot be levied mechanically; the Assessing Officer must apply an independent mind, grant a hearing, and record satisfaction that the income genuinely falls within the statutory definition, which requires discovery of an unrecorded asset or income entry during search.
The onus is on the Income Tax Department to prove that a particular receipt or amount is taxable and falls under the provisions of the Income-tax Act.
