https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238012 The ITAT upheld the disallowance of land cost attributable to the land sold by APHB on 500 LIG houses based on ownership and registration issues. The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income, which was challenged by the assessee. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty for the disallowance sustained by the ITAT, citing that making an inadmissible claim does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Revenue appealed, and the ITAT remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration of the penalty imposition. en-us Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Mar 2015 14:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238012 The ITAT upheld the disallowance of land cost attributable to the land sold by APHB on 500 LIG houses based on ownership and registration issues. The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income, which was challenged by the assessee. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty for the disallowance sustained by the ITAT, citing that making an inadmissible claim does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Revenue appealed, and the ITAT remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration of the penalty imposition. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238012