https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267192 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It was found that the difference in perception about the nature of the transaction did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Emphasizing the principle that penalties are not leviable unless details provided are incorrect or false, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty of Rs. 2,31,000, as the situation involved varying interpretations of the transaction falling under section 2(22)(e) without deliberate concealment of income. en-us Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Nov 2015 07:46:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267192 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It was found that the difference in perception about the nature of the transaction did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Emphasizing the principle that penalties are not leviable unless details provided are incorrect or false, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty of Rs. 2,31,000, as the situation involved varying interpretations of the transaction falling under section 2(22)(e) without deliberate concealment of income. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267192