https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204838 The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision to uphold a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the assessee. The penalty was imposed due to the significant variance between the disclosed annual rental income and the valuation report's estimated annual rental value. The Court found the assessee's explanation regarding the lease agreement and rental income to be non-bona fide, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing the justification for the penalty based on inaccurate particulars of income provided by the assessee. en-us Mon, 11 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Jun 2026 17:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204838 The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision to uphold a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the assessee. The penalty was imposed due to the significant variance between the disclosed annual rental income and the valuation report's estimated annual rental value. The Court found the assessee's explanation regarding the lease agreement and rental income to be non-bona fide, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The Court ruled in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing the justification for the penalty based on inaccurate particulars of income provided by the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204838