The Tribunal held that the return of income accepted by the AO and there was no loss to the Revenue. Only long-term capital loss had been reduced because of the lesser share of the assessee in the property. Hence it was not a furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of particulars of income. No penalty was leviable. (AY. 2014-15)
Anil Gupta v. ACIT (2019) 76 ITR 22 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib.)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Long term capital loss-Bona fide clerical mistake on part of assessee same has been explained before AO-Return of income accepted and there was no loss to revenue–No concealment of income or no furnishing inaccurate particulars of income-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 45]