Facts of the
Case
The assessee, Shri Shyam Construction Company,
engaged in construction contract work and supply of building materials, filed
its return of income for Assessment Years 2017-18 and 2018-19. During
assessment proceedings for AY 2017-18, the Assessing Officer observed a fall in
gross profit, absence of proper quantitative records, non-maintenance of stock
registers, lack of site-wise work-in-progress details, and unverifiable expense
vouchers. The Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice proposing rejection
of books under Section 145(3). The assessee explained that maintenance of
site-wise records was impractical considering the nature of its business. The
Assessing Officer rejected the explanation and made a lump-sum disallowance of
₹5,00,000 towards unverifiable expenses. Additionally, interest expenditure of
₹1,27,420 was found to have been paid without deduction of tax at source,
leading to disallowance of ₹38,226 under Section 40(a)(ia). Penalty proceedings
under Section 270A were initiated for under-reporting of income and penalty of
₹1,70,537 was levied, being 50 percent of tax on total additions of ₹5,38,226.
The CIT(A), NFAC confirmed the penalty. Similar facts existed for AY 2018-19,
leading to identical penalty levy.
Issues
Involved
Whether penalty under Section 270A is leviable
where additions are made on estimated basis after rejection of books of
account, whether such additions fall within the exclusion under Section
270A(6)(b), and whether disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) constitutes
under-reporting of income attracting penalty.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The assessee submitted that the additions were made
purely on estimation and therefore penalty under Section 270A was not leviable.
It was contended that the CIT(A) failed to consider submissions properly and
passed a non-speaking order. The assessee did not dispute the quantum additions
but argued that estimation-based additions should not lead to penalty for
under-reporting of income.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Revenue contended that the assessed income
exceeded the income processed under Section 143(1)(a), squarely attracting
Section 270A(2)(a). It was argued that the exclusion under Section 270A(6)(b)
applies only where accounts are found correct and complete but income cannot be
properly deduced due to the method employed. In the present case, the Assessing
Officer categorically recorded that the accounts were not correct and complete.
Therefore, the exclusion did not apply and penalty was correctly levied.
Court Order
/ Findings
The ITAT Jaipur held that the assessee’s case
clearly fell within the definition of under-reporting of income under Section
270A(2)(a), as the assessed income exceeded the income processed under Section
143(1)(a). The Tribunal analysed Section 270A(6)(b) and held that exclusion
from penalty for estimated additions applies only where accounts are correct
and complete to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. In the present case,
the Assessing Officer explicitly recorded serious deficiencies in maintenance
of books, quantitative records and vouchers, rendering the accounts unreliable.
Consequently, the benefit of exclusion under Section 270A(6)(b) was not
available. The Tribunal further noted that no arguments were advanced against
levy of penalty on disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). Accordingly, the
Tribunal upheld the levy of penalty under Section 270A for both assessment
years.
Important
Clarification
The Tribunal clarified that estimation-based
additions do not automatically escape penalty under Section 270A. The statutory
exclusion applies only when accounts are otherwise correct and complete but
income cannot be deduced due to the accounting method. Where books are found
unreliable or incomplete, estimated additions constitute under-reported income
attracting penalty. Disallowances under Section 40(a)(ia) also squarely fall
within the ambit of under-reporting.
Final
Outcome
Both appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment
Years 2017-18 and 2018-19 were dismissed. The levy of penalty under Section
270A of the Income-tax Act for under-reporting of income was upheld in full.
Link to download order-https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1768993468_SHRISHYAMCONSTRUCTIONCOMPANYJAIPURVS.ITOWD11JAIPURJAIPUR.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment