When the return of income and the assessed income are same, the machinery provision for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) fails, as the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is levied with reference to the tax sought to be evaded, which is the difference between the income returned and that assessed by the A.O.
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del) has expounded that penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) can only be levied if in the course of proceedings, the A.O. is satisfied that there is a concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The words ‘’in the course of any proceedings under this Act mean the assessment proceedings’. However, the question ‘whether there is concealment or inaccurate particulars’ has to be determined with reference to the returned income. Accordingly, in the background of the aforesaid discussion and precedent, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and delete the levy of penalty.