https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221308 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held not leviable where the assessee's section 80HHC claim was made on the basis of then-prevailing judicial authority and was later rejected only after the Supreme Court clarified the interplay with section 80AB. The court treated the claim as neither wholly without basis nor lacking bona fides, and held that a mere disallowance in quantum proceedings does not by itself establish furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The deletion of penalty was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 27 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Jun 2026 11:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221308 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held not leviable where the assessee's section 80HHC claim was made on the basis of then-prevailing judicial authority and was later rejected only after the Supreme Court clarified the interplay with section 80AB. The court treated the claim as neither wholly without basis nor lacking bona fides, and held that a mere disallowance in quantum proceedings does not by itself establish furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The deletion of penalty was therefore upheld in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221308