Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
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 4819 
Join Channel 
