https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331270 The tribunal allowed the appeal, finding the penalty under section 271(1)(c) unjustified. It held that denial of natural justice occurred as the CIT(A) did not allow the assessee to present arguments, wrongly assuming written submissions sufficed. The tribunal emphasized penalties require proof of concealment or inaccurate particulars, not established here. Disallowance of VAT deduction was deemed insufficient grounds for penalty. The tribunal directed deletion of the penalty, stressing the importance of natural justice and the necessity for a fair and objective approach in penalty proceedings. en-us Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:18:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331270 The tribunal allowed the appeal, finding the penalty under section 271(1)(c) unjustified. It held that denial of natural justice occurred as the CIT(A) did not allow the assessee to present arguments, wrongly assuming written submissions sufficed. The tribunal emphasized penalties require proof of concealment or inaccurate particulars, not established here. Disallowance of VAT deduction was deemed insufficient grounds for penalty. The tribunal directed deletion of the penalty, stressing the importance of natural justice and the necessity for a fair and objective approach in penalty proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331270