https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4603 The ITAT was correct in deleting the penalty under Section 158BFA(2) of the Income Tax Act as the power to impose penalty is considered discretionary, not mandatory. The Assessing Officer or Commissioner has the authority to direct penalty payment, indicating discretionary power in penalty imposition. Both the C.I.T. and ITAT exercised discretionary power with recorded reasons, leading to the court affirming ITAT's stance that the section is directory, not mandatory. The appeal was disposed of as the question framed became irrelevant based on this interpretation. en-us Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4603 The ITAT was correct in deleting the penalty under Section 158BFA(2) of the Income Tax Act as the power to impose penalty is considered discretionary, not mandatory. The Assessing Officer or Commissioner has the authority to direct penalty payment, indicating discretionary power in penalty imposition. Both the C.I.T. and ITAT exercised discretionary power with recorded reasons, leading to the court affirming ITAT's stance that the section is directory, not mandatory. The appeal was disposed of as the question framed became irrelevant based on this interpretation. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4603