Penalty under section 271(1)(c) deleted where income was disclosed in section 153A returns and remaining additions were only estimated or computationa...
Penalty under section 270A was unsustainable where the disputed claims related only to the allowability of expenditure already incurred. The Tribunal noted that loan processing charges and stamp duty were not denied as expenses, but were treated by the AO as capital in nature, and the preliminary expenses claim under section 35D failed only on eligibility. Because the issue was a debatable disallowance of deduction and there was no wilful furnishing of inaccurate particulars, under-reporting or misreporting was not made out. The penalty confirmed in appeal was deleted.
Penalty under section 270A was unsustainable where the disputed claims related only to the allowability of expenditure already incurred. The Tribunal noted that loan processing charges and stamp duty were not denied as expenses, but were treated by the AO as capital in nature, and the preliminary expenses claim under section 35D failed only on eligibility. Because the issue was a debatable disallowance of deduction and there was no wilful furnishing of inaccurate particulars, under-reporting or misreporting was not made out. The penalty confirmed in appeal was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
