https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196383 The appellant appealed against a penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for treating expenditure as capital instead of revenue. The Tribunal found that the disagreement with the Assessing Officer did not amount to inaccurate particulars being filed. Emphasizing the difference between a false claim and a genuine claim, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unwarranted as the details of expenditure were provided during assessment. Relying on the case law of Reliance Petro Products P. Ltd, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty. en-us Mon, 22 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Nov 2017 14:21:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196383 The appellant appealed against a penalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for treating expenditure as capital instead of revenue. The Tribunal found that the disagreement with the Assessing Officer did not amount to inaccurate particulars being filed. Emphasizing the difference between a false claim and a genuine claim, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unwarranted as the details of expenditure were provided during assessment. Relying on the case law of Reliance Petro Products P. Ltd, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196383