For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

In the instant case, appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds—

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/-without appreciating the fact that assessee has willfully avoided the disallowance of STT and donation paid to its computation of total income.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee is not entitled for deduction on account of donation paid in the absence of required documentary evidences like receipt and valid exemption certificate of the done."

Held that—It is an admitted fact that assessee failed to add back donation paid amounting to 50 lakh and STT paid amounting to 19,891 in the statement of total income. It is also an admitted fact that the assessee has filed revised statement of total income rectifying the said mistakes before completion of assessment proceedings. The reason given by the assessee for not disallowing those two items in the statement of total income is that there is an inadvertent error while filing return of income, which resulted in omission of those two items in the statement of total income. The said mistake is only a human error which cannot be considered as deliberate attempt made to evade payment of taxes. When we examine the claim of the assessee in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd vs CIT, Kolkata [2012] [SUPREME COURT] we find that the facts of the assessee’s case are identical to the facts of the case while deleting penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c). In the said case, although the tax auditor quantified the disallowance of certain amount, the assessee failed to add back in the statement of total income. Under those facts, this cannot be considered as wilful attempt made to evade payment of taxes and at best, it could be termed as a human error which we are all prone to make. In this case, on perusal of facts, we find that although the assessee has disclosed all facts in respect of those two items of expenses, but failed to add back in the statement of total income, while filing return of income. The said mistake has been rectified immediately after noticing during the course of assessment proceedings by filing revised statement of total income. Under these facts and circumstances, the AO was incorrect in coming to the conclusion that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income in respect of donation paid & STT which warrants levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c). - Decided against revenue.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Section 271 of Income Tax Act, 1961—Penalty u/s 271(1)(c)—In the instant case, appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds—

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/-without appreciating the fact that assessee has willfully avoided the disallowance of STT and donation paid to its computation of total income.
Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee is not entitled for deduction on account of donation paid in the absence of required documentary evidences like receipt and valid exemption certificate of the done."

Held that—It is an admitted fact that assessee failed to add back donation paid amounting to 50 lakh and STT paid amounting to 19,891 in the statement of total income. It is also an admitted fact that the assessee has filed revised statement of total income rectifying the said mistakes before completion of assessment proceedings. The reason given by the assessee for not disallowing those two items in the statement of total income is that there is an inadvertent error while filing return of income, which resulted in omission of those two items in the statement of total income.

The said mistake is only a human error which cannot be considered as deliberate attempt made to evade payment of taxes. When we examine the claim of the assessee in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd vs CIT, Kolkata [2012] [SUPREME COURT] we find that the facts of the assessee’s case are identical to the facts of the case while deleting penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c).

In the said case, although the tax auditor quantified the disallowance of certain amount, the assessee failed to add back in the statement of total income. Under those facts, this cannot be considered as wilful attempt made to evade payment of taxes and at best, it could be termed as a human error which we are all prone to make. In this case, on perusal of facts, we find that although the assessee has disclosed all facts in respect of those two items of expenses, but failed to add back in the statement of total income, while filing return of income. The said mistake has been rectified immediately after noticing during the course of assessment proceedings by filing revised statement of total income. Under these facts and circumstances, the AO was incorrect in coming to the conclusion that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income in respect of donation paid & STT which warrants levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c). - Decided against revenue. [DY. CIT, CIR. 2 (2) (1) , MUMBAI VERSUS M/S ISRANI INVESTMENTS PVT LTD.] [2018][7] [ITCD Online] [44] [ITAT MUMBAI]

In the instant case, appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds—

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/-without appreciating the fact that assessee has willfully avoided the disallowance of STT and donation paid to its computation of total income.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee is not entitled for deduction on account of donation paid in the absence of required documentary evidences like receipt and valid exemption certificate of the done."

Held that—It is an admitted fact that assessee failed to add back donation paid amounting to 50 lakh and STT paid amounting to 19,891 in the statement of total income. It is also an admitted fact that the assessee has filed revised statement of total income rectifying the said mistakes before completion of assessment proceedings. The reason given by the assessee for not disallowing those two items in the statement of total income is that there is an inadvertent error while filing return of income, which resulted in omission of those two items in the statement of total income. The said mistake is only a human error which cannot be considered as deliberate attempt made to evade payment of taxes. When we examine the claim of the assessee in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt Ltd vs CIT, Kolkata [2012] [SUPREME COURT] we find that the facts of the assessee’s case are identical to the facts of the case while deleting penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c). In the said case, although the tax auditor quantified the disallowance of certain amount, the assessee failed to add back in the statement of total income. Under those facts, this cannot be considered as wilful attempt made to evade payment of taxes and at best, it could be termed as a human error which we are all prone to make. In this case, on perusal of facts, we find that although the assessee has disclosed all facts in respect of those two items of expenses, but failed to add back in the statement of total income, while filing return of income. The said mistake has been rectified immediately after noticing during the course of assessment proceedings by filing revised statement of total income. Under these facts and circumstances, the AO was incorrect in coming to the conclusion that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income in respect of donation paid & STT which warrants levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c). - Decided against revenue.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Section 271 of Income Tax Act, 1961—Penalty u/s 271(1)(c)—In the instant case, appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds—

'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/-without appreciating the fact that assessee has willfully avoided the disallowance of STT and donation paid to its computation of total income.
Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the id. CIT(A) was right in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 271(l)(c) of the Act amounting to 15,51,146/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee is not entitled for deduction on account of donation paid in the absence of required documentary evidences like receipt and valid exemption certificate of the done."