https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178723 The Revenue's appeal against the deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) by ITAT Ahmedabad was dismissed. The ITAT upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to delete the penalty, considering the mistake as bonafide and not willful. The Revenue argued that the security transaction tax should have been added back as required by law, but the ITAT found no concealment of income or inaccurate particulars. The assessee's cooperation during assessment proceedings and the oversight attributed to workload led to the affirmation of the penalty deletion. en-us Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:20:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178723 The Revenue's appeal against the deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) by ITAT Ahmedabad was dismissed. The ITAT upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to delete the penalty, considering the mistake as bonafide and not willful. The Revenue argued that the security transaction tax should have been added back as required by law, but the ITAT found no concealment of income or inaccurate particulars. The assessee's cooperation during assessment proceedings and the oversight attributed to workload led to the affirmation of the penalty deletion. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178723