https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357243 ITAT Visakhapatnam held that penalty u/s 271AAB was not leviable where no undisclosed income or incriminating material was found during search operations. The assessee's construction cost projections aligned with disclosed statements, and the AO accepted the disclosure without verifying against books of accounts. The revenue failed to link seized loose sheets to actual undisclosed income, assets, or inflated expenditure. Following precedent from ITAT Delhi in Ajay Sharma case, the tribunal ruled that additions based solely on loose documents without direct material establishing concealment or inaccurate particulars cannot sustain penalty provisions. Since no undisclosed income was established and no incriminating evidence was discovered during search, penalty u/s 271AAB was cancelled and the order was decided in favor of the assessee. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jul 2025 15:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357243 ITAT Visakhapatnam held that penalty u/s 271AAB was not leviable where no undisclosed income or incriminating material was found during search operations. The assessee's construction cost projections aligned with disclosed statements, and the AO accepted the disclosure without verifying against books of accounts. The revenue failed to link seized loose sheets to actual undisclosed income, assets, or inflated expenditure. Following precedent from ITAT Delhi in Ajay Sharma case, the tribunal ruled that additions based solely on loose documents without direct material establishing concealment or inaccurate particulars cannot sustain penalty provisions. Since no undisclosed income was established and no incriminating evidence was discovered during search, penalty u/s 271AAB was cancelled and the order was decided in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357243