Mere Allowable Deductions Variance is not Inaccurate furnishing of Income Particulars

PCIT Vs ICICI Bank Ltd (Bombay High Court)

Introduction: The case of PCIT versus ICICI Bank Ltd, heard by the Bombay High Court, revolves around the imposition of penalties under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The dispute arose from variations in allowable deductions claimed by the assessee. This article delves into the court’s analysis and the implications of its ruling.

Detailed Analysis: The essence of the case lies in the dispute over whether the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income by claiming deductions not initially mentioned in the return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) imposed penalties under Section 271(1)(c), alleging inaccuracies in income reporting.

The crux of the matter hinges on the nature of the deductions claimed by the assessee. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and subsequent appellate authorities examined the validity of the deductions and the bonafide nature of the claims.

The ITAT concluded that the assessee’s claim for deductions under Section 36(1)(viii) was bona fide, even though these deductions were not initially claimed in the return of income. The variance in allowable deductions was attributed to changes in the determination of business profit, rather than deliberate inaccuracies on the part of the assessee.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.