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

Pankaj Dua, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 517/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamblepankaj Dua Vs Acit 10/45, Geeta Colony, Circle 36(1) New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Akppd9635F Appellant Respondent Appellant/ Assessee By Sh. Ashish, Ca Respondent/ Revenue By Sh. Atiq Ahmed, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2018 Order Per Suchitra Kamble, Jm This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.11.2014 Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-Xxvii, New Delhi For Ay 2005-06. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: 1. “That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Both The Lower Authorities I.E. Ao & Cit (A), Have Erred In Imposition Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & As Such The Order Impugned Herein Under May Kindly Be Held As Bad In Law & The Penalty Imposed Of Rs. 7,86,046/- May Kindly Be Deleted. 2. That Without Prejudice, The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C ) Has Been Imposed On Presumptive Basis Without Any Satisfaction Or Without There Being Any Concealment Of Income Or Filing Of Inaccurate Particulars. The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C ) Of Rs. 7,86,046/- May Thus Be Deleted. 3. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ao Has Erred In Not Appreciating The Submissions Submitted During The Course Of Penalty Proceedings & Also In Not Stating As To The How & To What Extent The Submissions Of The Assessee Are Not Considered. As Such Penalty Of Rs. 7,86,046/- U/S 271(1)(C ) Of The Act May Kindly Be Deleted.

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 275(1)(a)