https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345092 The High Court held that the Tribunal incorrectly invoked Explanation 1 to Section 271(1)(c) as the basis for penalty proceedings was refuted in the Quantum Appeal. The assessee's explanation regarding the Draft Discounting business was deemed bona fide and substantiated, leading to the invalidation of the penalty. Consequently, the penalty provisions under Section 271(1)(c) were found to be inapplicable, and the reference was resolved in favor of the assessee without costs. en-us Thu, 06 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345092 The High Court held that the Tribunal incorrectly invoked Explanation 1 to Section 271(1)(c) as the basis for penalty proceedings was refuted in the Quantum Appeal. The assessee's explanation regarding the Draft Discounting business was deemed bona fide and substantiated, leading to the invalidation of the penalty. Consequently, the penalty provisions under Section 271(1)(c) were found to be inapplicable, and the reference was resolved in favor of the assessee without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345092