Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
The Appellate Tribunal (ITAT Delhi) in the appeal for AY 2015-16 against the CIT(A)/NFAC's order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dealt with penalty imposition of Rs. 1,40,466/- for furnishing "inaccurate particulars of income" related to a quantum addition of Rs. 4,54,583/- due to re-estimation of business income profits. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court ruling in CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts (P) Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158 (SC), emphasizing that "it is not each and every quantum disallowance which would automatically attract the impugned penalty provision." Since the issue involved a subjective re-estimation of business turnover profits, it did not fall within the scope of section 271(1)(c) penalty. Consequently, the penalty was deleted and the appeal allowed.