https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332543 The penalty under section 271(1)(c) for the Assistant Years 2005-06 and 2006-07 was not justified. The tribunal found that the explanations provided by the assessee were acceptable and plausible, leading to the deletion of the penalties. In the case of unaccounted stock addition, the explanation was accepted by the ld.CIT(A), and for the cash credit addition in the subsequent year, the tribunal deemed the explanation credible with no evidence of mala fide intent. Therefore, the penalties were deleted in both appeals. en-us Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Sep 2016 09:09:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332543 The penalty under section 271(1)(c) for the Assistant Years 2005-06 and 2006-07 was not justified. The tribunal found that the explanations provided by the assessee were acceptable and plausible, leading to the deletion of the penalties. In the case of unaccounted stock addition, the explanation was accepted by the ld.CIT(A), and for the cash credit addition in the subsequent year, the tribunal deemed the explanation credible with no evidence of mala fide intent. Therefore, the penalties were deleted in both appeals. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332543