https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276796 The Tribunal allowed the Assessee's appeal, reversing the decision to confirm the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of Rs. 11,00,922. The Tribunal found no deliberate concealment or contumacious conduct, citing frequent law amendments and lack of awareness of amended provisions for the assessment year. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the interest disallowance was debatable, ultimately deleting the penalty in line with the decision in CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts. en-us Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Nov 2018 14:49:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276796 The Tribunal allowed the Assessee's appeal, reversing the decision to confirm the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of Rs. 11,00,922. The Tribunal found no deliberate concealment or contumacious conduct, citing frequent law amendments and lack of awareness of amended provisions for the assessment year. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the interest disallowance was debatable, ultimately deleting the penalty in line with the decision in CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276796