https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265108 The Tribunal allowed the appeal and quashed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It held that the claim, though incorrect, was not a false claim but a bonafide error. The Tribunal considered the reliance on figures from the sale deed and the absence of intent to deceive. The decision was based on precedents like Reliance Petro Products and PWC cases. The penalty was overturned due to the genuine mistake in claiming depreciation on windmills. en-us Fri, 05 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Oct 2015 11:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265108 The Tribunal allowed the appeal and quashed the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It held that the claim, though incorrect, was not a false claim but a bonafide error. The Tribunal considered the reliance on figures from the sale deed and the absence of intent to deceive. The decision was based on precedents like Reliance Petro Products and PWC cases. The penalty was overturned due to the genuine mistake in claiming depreciation on windmills. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265108