Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Penalty- sec. 271(1)(c ) – when two views are possible penalty cannot be imposed

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2010 taxguru.in 242
Case Name
Ito Vs Mahavir Cycle Industries (ITAT Chandigarh)
Advertisement

In the case of: ITO Vs MAHAVIR CYCLE INDUSTRIES, Decided by: ITAT, CHANDIGARH, Decided on 24th September, 2009

Gist of decision: No penalty is imposable in respect of vexed legal issues which are debatable or on which two views/opinions are possible. For imposing penalty under s. 271(1)(c), the twin conditions of furnishing of inaccurate particulars or concealment of income has to be satisfied.

Since the claim was made on the advice of an outside expert (being the auditor/ chartered accountant) and there being no mala fides, the same would not result in invoking of s. 271(1)(c). Even otherwise, when there is a bona fide claim made by the assessee, no penalty may be levied. While deleting the penalty, there is a finding in the impugned order that there were divergent opinion on the issue of deduction under s. 80HHC in respect of sale of scrap, therefore, the issue was debatable/ vexed legal issue, wherein two views were possible, the penalty was held to be not justified. In view of the aforesaid facts there is no infirmity in the impugned order, the same is upheld.

NF

Paid content

Become a Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.