https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340386 The ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was not warranted for estimating gross profits after rejecting the books. The judgment emphasized the distinction between quantum and penalty proceedings, stating that not every addition in quantum proceedings triggers the penalty provision. The ITAT found the estimation of gross profits did not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealing income, leading to the deletion of the penalty. en-us Thu, 16 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:59:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340386 The ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was not warranted for estimating gross profits after rejecting the books. The judgment emphasized the distinction between quantum and penalty proceedings, stating that not every addition in quantum proceedings triggers the penalty provision. The ITAT found the estimation of gross profits did not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealing income, leading to the deletion of the penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 16 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340386