https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381655 The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer (A.O) had properly applied his mind in dropping the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It was determined that the assessee had voluntarily disclosed the understated income before receiving information from the A.O. The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) had unjustly exercised revisional jurisdiction under Section 263, leading to the quashing of her order and restoration of the A.O's decision to drop the penalty proceedings. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed. en-us Thu, 06 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 16 Jun 2019 16:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381655 The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer (A.O) had properly applied his mind in dropping the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It was determined that the assessee had voluntarily disclosed the understated income before receiving information from the A.O. The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) had unjustly exercised revisional jurisdiction under Section 263, leading to the quashing of her order and restoration of the A.O's decision to drop the penalty proceedings. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381655