https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188321 The case involved a dispute over the disallowance of depreciation claimed by a company manufacturing abrasives and refractors. The Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation as a double deduction, but the CIT(A) and Tribunal found the claim was made in good faith due to unsettled legal issues. The Tribunal ruled that the company's actions were not false, leading to the dismissal of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Supreme Court emphasized the need for proving deliberate concealment for imposing penalties, ultimately dismissing the Revenue's appeal. en-us Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Nov 2016 16:24:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188321 The case involved a dispute over the disallowance of depreciation claimed by a company manufacturing abrasives and refractors. The Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation as a double deduction, but the CIT(A) and Tribunal found the claim was made in good faith due to unsettled legal issues. The Tribunal ruled that the company's actions were not false, leading to the dismissal of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Supreme Court emphasized the need for proving deliberate concealment for imposing penalties, ultimately dismissing the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188321