https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342515 Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) could not be sustained where the quantum addition had already been decided in favour of the assessee. The Court noted that once the underlying addition relating to capital gains from a development arrangement no longer survived, the foundation for alleging concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars also disappeared. In the absence of any independent basis apart from the deleted quantum addition, the revenue could not justify the penalty. The appeal was dismissed and the penalty was treated as not exigible. en-us Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Aug 2018 18:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342515 Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) could not be sustained where the quantum addition had already been decided in favour of the assessee. The Court noted that once the underlying addition relating to capital gains from a development arrangement no longer survived, the foundation for alleging concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars also disappeared. In the absence of any independent basis apart from the deleted quantum addition, the revenue could not justify the penalty. The appeal was dismissed and the penalty was treated as not exigible. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342515