https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169564 The High Court held that penalties cannot be imposed solely based on disallowances made under regular provisions if there is no increase in tax liability under normal provisions. The penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) were deleted by the CIT (A) based on this principle, supported by the decision in CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. The court emphasized the importance of considering the distinction between tax liabilities under normal provisions and Minimum Alternate Tax provisions when determining penalty imposition for disallowances made under regular provisions. en-us Fri, 10 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:23:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169564 The High Court held that penalties cannot be imposed solely based on disallowances made under regular provisions if there is no increase in tax liability under normal provisions. The penalties imposed under section 271(1)(c) were deleted by the CIT (A) based on this principle, supported by the decision in CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd. The court emphasized the importance of considering the distinction between tax liabilities under normal provisions and Minimum Alternate Tax provisions when determining penalty imposition for disallowances made under regular provisions. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169564