https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8679 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, ruling in favor of the assessee in a penalty case under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The Court agreed that the firm's valuation method, consistent with the predecessor firm's practice and accepted by the department, did not amount to fraud or wilful neglect. Emphasizing the importance of adherence to established practices and department acceptance, the Court concluded that the firm could not be penalized for income discrepancies. The penalty was canceled, and the Income-tax Officer was directed to refund the amount. en-us Wed, 24 May 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2009 18:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8679 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, ruling in favor of the assessee in a penalty case under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The Court agreed that the firm's valuation method, consistent with the predecessor firm's practice and accepted by the department, did not amount to fraud or wilful neglect. Emphasizing the importance of adherence to established practices and department acceptance, the Court concluded that the firm could not be penalized for income discrepancies. The penalty was canceled, and the Income-tax Officer was directed to refund the amount. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 May 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8679