https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336096 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, citing lack of evidence for inaccurate particulars or income concealment by the government undertaking assessee. The ITAT noted inconsistency in penalty imposition by the AO for different assessment years, concluding the penalty was unjustified. As a result, the ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s order. en-us Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336096 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, citing lack of evidence for inaccurate particulars or income concealment by the government undertaking assessee. The ITAT noted inconsistency in penalty imposition by the AO for different assessment years, concluding the penalty was unjustified. As a result, the ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s order. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336096