https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325633 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, dismissing the penalty of Rs. 32,850 imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the variance between surrendered and returned income. It was determined that the undisclosed investment in house property, which led to the penalty proceedings, was based on a valuer's assessment and not an attempt to mislead. The Tribunal found that no inaccurate particulars were furnished as the correct valuation was determined later, resulting in the penalty being deemed unwarranted. en-us Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Mar 2016 13:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325633 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, dismissing the penalty of Rs. 32,850 imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the variance between surrendered and returned income. It was determined that the undisclosed investment in house property, which led to the penalty proceedings, was based on a valuer's assessment and not an attempt to mislead. The Tribunal found that no inaccurate particulars were furnished as the correct valuation was determined later, resulting in the penalty being deemed unwarranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325633