CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd (Supreme Court)

DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: May 11, 2012 (Date of publication)

Click here to download the judgement (nalwa_sons_SLP_dismissal.pdf)

Despite concealment, no s. 271(1)(c) penalty if s. 115JB book profits assessed

For AY 2001-02, the assessee filed a ROI declaring loss of Rs.43.47 crores under the normal provisions of the Act and book profits of Rs.3.86 crores u/s 115JB. The AO assessed a loss at Rs.36.95 crores as per normal provisions and book profits at Rs.4.01 crores. As there was a reduction in the loss under the normal provisions owing to various additions and disallownaces, the AO levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in accordance with with Explanation 4 & Gold Coin 304 ITR 308 (SC). Before the High Court, the assessee argued that even if there was a concealment u/s 271(1)(c) with respect to the normal assessment, the same was not relevant because the assessee’s income was assessed u/s 115JB. The High Court accepted the plea and held that as the s. 115JB “book profits” were by a legal fiction deemed to be the “total income”, the furnishing of wrong particulars had no effect on “the amount of tax sought to be evaded” as defined in Explanation 4 to s. 271(1)(c). On appeal by the department to the Supreme Court, HELD:

Delay condoned. The special leave petition is dismissed.

Nalwa is followed in Ruchi Strips. See Ushdev Intl 129 ITD 167 (Mum) for the effect of MAT credit

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *