https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376454 The ITAT upheld the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing that the income was estimated under deeming provisions, and there was no merit in imposing the penalty. The ITAT also confirmed the application of Accounting Standard - 7 (AS-7) did not apply to the case as the assessee consistently followed the project completion method. Additionally, the ITAT clarified that the assessee was a real estate developer, not a contractor, emphasizing the need for consistency in accounting methods. The ITAT dismissed the appeal challenging the CIT(A) order, highlighting that penalty for concealment could not stand when quantum additions were deleted. en-us Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Mar 2019 11:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376454 The ITAT upheld the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing that the income was estimated under deeming provisions, and there was no merit in imposing the penalty. The ITAT also confirmed the application of Accounting Standard - 7 (AS-7) did not apply to the case as the assessee consistently followed the project completion method. Additionally, the ITAT clarified that the assessee was a real estate developer, not a contractor, emphasizing the need for consistency in accounting methods. The ITAT dismissed the appeal challenging the CIT(A) order, highlighting that penalty for concealment could not stand when quantum additions were deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376454