https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342626 The Tribunal upheld the appellate order, finding no violation of natural justice or the provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961. The penalties under Section 271(1)(c) for foreign travel expenses and addition under Section 68 were confirmed, as the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income intending to evade taxes. The penalty notice was deemed valid, and the disallowed foreign travel expenses and addition under Section 68 were justified due to lack of business relevance and failure to prove transaction authenticity. The decision highlighted the importance of substantiating claims to avoid penalties under the Act. en-us Fri, 05 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 May 2017 07:40:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342626 The Tribunal upheld the appellate order, finding no violation of natural justice or the provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961. The penalties under Section 271(1)(c) for foreign travel expenses and addition under Section 68 were confirmed, as the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income intending to evade taxes. The penalty notice was deemed valid, and the disallowed foreign travel expenses and addition under Section 68 were justified due to lack of business relevance and failure to prove transaction authenticity. The decision highlighted the importance of substantiating claims to avoid penalties under the Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342626