Misdeclaration of quantity rejected where supplier evidence established counting errors, so reassessment, confiscation and redemption fine were set as...
Admissibility of electronic evidence controls valuation and penalty exposure; non compliant e records and statements nullify revaluation and penalties...
Penalty under s. 270A(1) r/w s. 270A(9)(c) for alleged false expense claims was examined where the underlying addition comprised an ad hoc disallowance sustained at 20% on an estimated basis. Since the income adjustment was purely estimative and did not meet the statutory parameters of "under-reported income" warranting penal consequences, and the AO had not recorded the requisite satisfaction to justify levy under s. 270A, the penalty was held arbitrary and void ab initio. Penalty was quashed and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Penalty under s. 270A(1) r/w s. 270A(9)(c) for alleged false expense claims was examined where the underlying addition comprised an ad hoc disallowance sustained at 20% on an estimated basis. Since the income adjustment was purely estimative and did not meet the statutory parameters of "under-reported income" warranting penal consequences, and the AO had not recorded the requisite satisfaction to justify levy under s. 270A, the penalty was held arbitrary and void ab initio. Penalty was quashed and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.