Section 274 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.471

Section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 471 (Procedure) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 471 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 274 is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 of the 4,894 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 274

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.

CIT v. Manu Engg
122 ITR 306 · 1980 · High Court
505
citing judgments

When levying a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer must clearly specify whether it is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. An ambiguous notice or order using "and/or" for these limbs, or a standard proforma without striking irrelevant clauses, indicates non-application of mind and renders the penalty unsustainable.

Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa
83 ITR 26 · 1972 · Supreme Court
502
citing judgments

An order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation results from quasi-criminal proceedings. Penalty is not ordinarily imposed unless the party acted deliberately in defiance of law, was guilty of contumacious or dishonest conduct, or acted in conscious disregard of their obligation.

Judgments on Section 274

Star Quenchers Spirit P.Ltd, Aurangabad vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 591/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.591/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Star Quenchers Spirit P. Ltd., Flat No.5, Sukhakarta Sankul, Garkheda, Aurangabad-431001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Tan : Nsksi2333G बनाम / V/S. Jcit, Tds Range, ……""यथ" / Respondent Nahik. Assessee By : Shri S. N. Puranik Revenue By : Mrs. Shabana Parveen सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Aurangabad Dated 02.12.2016 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals Has Erred In Confirming The Penalty U/S 272A(2)(K) R.W.S. 200(3) Of Rs.1,09,304/- Same May Please Be Deleted. 2. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Cancelling The Penalty Order By Cit, As Said Order Is Without Prejudice & Sufficient Opportunity U/S 274, Hence Bad In Law. 3. Appellant Prays For Just & Equitable Relief.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. PuranikFor Respondent: Mrs. Shabana Parveen
Section 272A(2)(k)Section 274

Coca-Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. ACIT, Range-1, Pune

In the result, the cross appeals of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 926/PUN/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Sl. No. Ita No. Name Of Appellant Name Of Asst. Year Respondent 1-3 1386/Pun/2006 Coca Cola India Pvt. Dcit, Circle-1(1), 1999-2000 1387/Pun/2006 Ltd., Pune. 2000-01 1388/Pun/2006 Plot No.1109-10, 2001-02 Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 4-5 150/Pun/2007 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Coca Cola India Pvt. 1999-2000 151/Pun/2007 Pune. Ltd., 2000-01 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 6-7 925/Pun/2011 Coca Cola India Pvt. Addl. Cit, Range-1, 2002-03 926/Pun/2011 Ltd., Pune. 2003-04 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G Assessee By : Shri R. Murlidhar Shri Nikhil Garg Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are 7 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 1999-2000 To 2003-04. There Are No Cross-Appeals By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04. Two Cross- Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 1999-2000 & 2000-01. Since The Facts & Levy Of Penalty Is The Common Issue For 2 Coca Cola India Private Limited All The 7 Appeals Under Consideration, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. 2. Since The Legal Issues Relating To Recording Of Satisfaction By The Assessing Officer At The Time Of Initiation Of The Penalty Proceedings & Arguments Of Both The Sides Involved In All These 7 Appeals Are Common, Therefore, The Appeal In Ita No.1386/Pun/2006 For The Assessment Year 1999-2000 Taken As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Coca-Cola India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. ACIT, Range-1, Pune

In the result, the cross appeals of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 925/PUN/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Sl. No. Ita No. Name Of Appellant Name Of Asst. Year Respondent 1-3 1386/Pun/2006 Coca Cola India Pvt. Dcit, Circle-1(1), 1999-2000 1387/Pun/2006 Ltd., Pune. 2000-01 1388/Pun/2006 Plot No.1109-10, 2001-02 Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 4-5 150/Pun/2007 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Coca Cola India Pvt. 1999-2000 151/Pun/2007 Pune. Ltd., 2000-01 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 6-7 925/Pun/2011 Coca Cola India Pvt. Addl. Cit, Range-1, 2002-03 926/Pun/2011 Ltd., Pune. 2003-04 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G Assessee By : Shri R. Murlidhar Shri Nikhil Garg Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are 7 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 1999-2000 To 2003-04. There Are No Cross-Appeals By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04. Two Cross- Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 1999-2000 & 2000-01. Since The Facts & Levy Of Penalty Is The Common Issue For 2 Coca Cola India Private Limited All The 7 Appeals Under Consideration, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. 2. Since The Legal Issues Relating To Recording Of Satisfaction By The Assessing Officer At The Time Of Initiation Of The Penalty Proceedings & Arguments Of Both The Sides Involved In All These 7 Appeals Are Common, Therefore, The Appeal In Ita No.1386/Pun/2006 For The Assessment Year 1999-2000 Taken As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

DCIT Cir 1(1), Pune vs. Coco Cola India (P) Ltd, Pune

In the result, the cross appeals of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 151/PUN/2007[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Sl. No. Ita No. Name Of Appellant Name Of Asst. Year Respondent 1-3 1386/Pun/2006 Coca Cola India Pvt. Dcit, Circle-1(1), 1999-2000 1387/Pun/2006 Ltd., Pune. 2000-01 1388/Pun/2006 Plot No.1109-10, 2001-02 Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 4-5 150/Pun/2007 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Coca Cola India Pvt. 1999-2000 151/Pun/2007 Pune. Ltd., 2000-01 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 6-7 925/Pun/2011 Coca Cola India Pvt. Addl. Cit, Range-1, 2002-03 926/Pun/2011 Ltd., Pune. 2003-04 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G Assessee By : Shri R. Murlidhar Shri Nikhil Garg Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are 7 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 1999-2000 To 2003-04. There Are No Cross-Appeals By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04. Two Cross- Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 1999-2000 & 2000-01. Since The Facts & Levy Of Penalty Is The Common Issue For 2 Coca Cola India Private Limited All The 7 Appeals Under Consideration, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. 2. Since The Legal Issues Relating To Recording Of Satisfaction By The Assessing Officer At The Time Of Initiation Of The Penalty Proceedings & Arguments Of Both The Sides Involved In All These 7 Appeals Are Common, Therefore, The Appeal In Ita No.1386/Pun/2006 For The Assessment Year 1999-2000 Taken As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

DCIT Cir 1(1), Pune vs. Coco Cola India (P) Ltd, Pune

In the result, the cross appeals of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 150/PUN/2007[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Sl. No. Ita No. Name Of Appellant Name Of Asst. Year Respondent 1-3 1386/Pun/2006 Coca Cola India Pvt. Dcit, Circle-1(1), 1999-2000 1387/Pun/2006 Ltd., Pune. 2000-01 1388/Pun/2006 Plot No.1109-10, 2001-02 Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 4-5 150/Pun/2007 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Coca Cola India Pvt. 1999-2000 151/Pun/2007 Pune. Ltd., 2000-01 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 6-7 925/Pun/2011 Coca Cola India Pvt. Addl. Cit, Range-1, 2002-03 926/Pun/2011 Ltd., Pune. 2003-04 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G Assessee By : Shri R. Murlidhar Shri Nikhil Garg Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are 7 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 1999-2000 To 2003-04. There Are No Cross-Appeals By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04. Two Cross- Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 1999-2000 & 2000-01. Since The Facts & Levy Of Penalty Is The Common Issue For 2 Coca Cola India Private Limited All The 7 Appeals Under Consideration, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. 2. Since The Legal Issues Relating To Recording Of Satisfaction By The Assessing Officer At The Time Of Initiation Of The Penalty Proceedings & Arguments Of Both The Sides Involved In All These 7 Appeals Are Common, Therefore, The Appeal In Ita No.1386/Pun/2006 For The Assessment Year 1999-2000 Taken As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Coco Cola India (P) Ltd, Pune vs. DCIT Cir 1(1)

In the result, the cross appeals of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 1388/PUN/2006[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Sl. No. Ita No. Name Of Appellant Name Of Asst. Year Respondent 1-3 1386/Pun/2006 Coca Cola India Pvt. Dcit, Circle-1(1), 1999-2000 1387/Pun/2006 Ltd., Pune. 2000-01 1388/Pun/2006 Plot No.1109-10, 2001-02 Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 4-5 150/Pun/2007 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Coca Cola India Pvt. 1999-2000 151/Pun/2007 Pune. Ltd., 2000-01 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 6-7 925/Pun/2011 Coca Cola India Pvt. Addl. Cit, Range-1, 2002-03 926/Pun/2011 Ltd., Pune. 2003-04 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G Assessee By : Shri R. Murlidhar Shri Nikhil Garg Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are 7 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 1999-2000 To 2003-04. There Are No Cross-Appeals By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04. Two Cross- Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 1999-2000 & 2000-01. Since The Facts & Levy Of Penalty Is The Common Issue For 2 Coca Cola India Private Limited All The 7 Appeals Under Consideration, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. 2. Since The Legal Issues Relating To Recording Of Satisfaction By The Assessing Officer At The Time Of Initiation Of The Penalty Proceedings & Arguments Of Both The Sides Involved In All These 7 Appeals Are Common, Therefore, The Appeal In Ita No.1386/Pun/2006 For The Assessment Year 1999-2000 Taken As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Coco Cola India (P) Ltd, Pune vs. DCIT Cir 1(1)

In the result, the cross appeals of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 1387/PUN/2006[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Sl. No. Ita No. Name Of Appellant Name Of Asst. Year Respondent 1-3 1386/Pun/2006 Coca Cola India Pvt. Dcit, Circle-1(1), 1999-2000 1387/Pun/2006 Ltd., Pune. 2000-01 1388/Pun/2006 Plot No.1109-10, 2001-02 Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 4-5 150/Pun/2007 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Coca Cola India Pvt. 1999-2000 151/Pun/2007 Pune. Ltd., 2000-01 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 6-7 925/Pun/2011 Coca Cola India Pvt. Addl. Cit, Range-1, 2002-03 926/Pun/2011 Ltd., Pune. 2003-04 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G Assessee By : Shri R. Murlidhar Shri Nikhil Garg Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are 7 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 1999-2000 To 2003-04. There Are No Cross-Appeals By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04. Two Cross- Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 1999-2000 & 2000-01. Since The Facts & Levy Of Penalty Is The Common Issue For 2 Coca Cola India Private Limited All The 7 Appeals Under Consideration, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. 2. Since The Legal Issues Relating To Recording Of Satisfaction By The Assessing Officer At The Time Of Initiation Of The Penalty Proceedings & Arguments Of Both The Sides Involved In All These 7 Appeals Are Common, Therefore, The Appeal In Ita No.1386/Pun/2006 For The Assessment Year 1999-2000 Taken As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Coco Cola India (P) Ltd, Pune vs. DCIT Cir 1(1)

In the result, the cross appeals of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 1386/PUN/2006[99-00]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Aug 2019

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm Sl. No. Ita No. Name Of Appellant Name Of Asst. Year Respondent 1-3 1386/Pun/2006 Coca Cola India Pvt. Dcit, Circle-1(1), 1999-2000 1387/Pun/2006 Ltd., Pune. 2000-01 1388/Pun/2006 Plot No.1109-10, 2001-02 Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 4-5 150/Pun/2007 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Coca Cola India Pvt. 1999-2000 151/Pun/2007 Pune. Ltd., 2000-01 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G 6-7 925/Pun/2011 Coca Cola India Pvt. Addl. Cit, Range-1, 2002-03 926/Pun/2011 Ltd., Pune. 2003-04 Plot No.1109-10, Village Pirangut, Tal. Munshi, Pune. Pan : Aaacb8573G Assessee By : Shri R. Murlidhar Shri Nikhil Garg Revenue By : Shri S. B. Prasad सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: There Are 7 Appeals Under Consideration Involving The Assessment Years 1999-2000 To 2003-04. There Are No Cross-Appeals By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04. Two Cross- Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 1999-2000 & 2000-01. Since The Facts & Levy Of Penalty Is The Common Issue For 2 Coca Cola India Private Limited All The 7 Appeals Under Consideration, Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Composite Order. 2. Since The Legal Issues Relating To Recording Of Satisfaction By The Assessing Officer At The Time Of Initiation Of The Penalty Proceedings & Arguments Of Both The Sides Involved In All These 7 Appeals Are Common, Therefore, The Appeal In Ita No.1386/Pun/2006 For The Assessment Year 1999-2000 Taken As The Lead Case For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274