https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211879 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under Section 271G of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was found that the assessee had substantially complied by providing most of the required information within the deadline, and the failure to fully comply was due to a procedural violation rather than intentional non-compliance. The accepted arm's length price further supported the conclusion that the penalty was unwarranted, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. en-us Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Apr 2012 10:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211879 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under Section 271G of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was found that the assessee had substantially complied by providing most of the required information within the deadline, and the failure to fully comply was due to a procedural violation rather than intentional non-compliance. The accepted arm's length price further supported the conclusion that the penalty was unwarranted, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211879