Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied for disallowance u/s 80IB(10). The assessee's claim was based on financial statements, adopting one of the possible interpretations, and similar claims were made in earlier years without penalty. The Tribunal held that penalty cannot be automatic for every addition/disallowance in assessment proceedings, relying on Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory case. The assessee made a bona fide claim believing it was allowable under the law. Reliance Petroleum Products Ltd. case held that an incorrect claim in law cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. Thus, the penalty was set aside in favor of the assessee.
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied for disallowance u/s 80IB(10). The assessee's claim was based on financial statements, adopting one of the possible interpretations, and similar claims were made in earlier years without penalty. The Tribunal held that penalty cannot be automatic for every addition/disallowance in assessment proceedings, relying on Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory case. The assessee made a bona fide claim believing it was allowable under the law. Reliance Petroleum Products Ltd. case held that an incorrect claim in law cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. Thus, the penalty was set aside in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
