Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
- βοΈ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- π Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws β


Just a moment...
Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws β


Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) related to the addition of closing stock. The AO levied penalty on an addition u/s 36(1)(iii) that was deleted by the CIT(A), showing a lack of application of mind. Both authorities failed to provide reasons for considering the closing stock valuation addition as concealment. The Tribunal found no basis for concluding that the addition constituted inaccurate particulars, citing legal precedent. The Tribunal examined the valuation difference in closing stock, noting the assessee's justifications were not refuted by the Revenue. As the explanation was deemed bona fide, the penalty was deemed unsustainable, ruling in favor of the assessee.