https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371145 The appeal against the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2005-06 was allowed by ITAT Rajkot. The tribunal found the discrepancy in receipts to be a clerical error, akin to a bonafide mistake, and deleted the penalty on suppressed receipts. The argument regarding the notice's vagueness was not admitted or decided upon as the appeal was allowed on merit. Consequently, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was set aside due to the unintentional nature of the discrepancy in receipts. en-us Mon, 26 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Nov 2018 19:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371145 The appeal against the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2005-06 was allowed by ITAT Rajkot. The tribunal found the discrepancy in receipts to be a clerical error, akin to a bonafide mistake, and deleted the penalty on suppressed receipts. The argument regarding the notice's vagueness was not admitted or decided upon as the appeal was allowed on merit. Consequently, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was set aside due to the unintentional nature of the discrepancy in receipts. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371145