https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2079 The High Court upheld the decision of the CIT(A) to cancel the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found that the assessee's revised return was filed to avoid potential litigation, not with malafide intent. The Court emphasized the need for conscious concealment to impose a penalty and concluded that there was no evidence of guilty intent. Additionally, it ruled in favor of the assessee on the issue of false claims of deduction, noting that the withdrawal of the depreciation claim was not intentional concealment. The Court also considered the assessee's history of penalty proceedings, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee and disposing of the reference accordingly. en-us Mon, 04 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Sep 2016 11:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2079 The High Court upheld the decision of the CIT(A) to cancel the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found that the assessee's revised return was filed to avoid potential litigation, not with malafide intent. The Court emphasized the need for conscious concealment to impose a penalty and concluded that there was no evidence of guilty intent. Additionally, it ruled in favor of the assessee on the issue of false claims of deduction, noting that the withdrawal of the depreciation claim was not intentional concealment. The Court also considered the assessee's history of penalty proceedings, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee and disposing of the reference accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 04 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2079