https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337808 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2005-06. The ITAT found that the expenses reallocation by the AO was not supported by evidence of false information provided by the assessee. The claim was made in good faith based on professional advice and a certificate from a Chartered Accountant. Citing legal precedents, the ITAT concluded that the claim, even if not sustainable in law, did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s order. en-us Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Apr 2017 10:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337808 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2005-06. The ITAT found that the expenses reallocation by the AO was not supported by evidence of false information provided by the assessee. The claim was made in good faith based on professional advice and a certificate from a Chartered Accountant. Citing legal precedents, the ITAT concluded that the claim, even if not sustainable in law, did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s order. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337808