https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383863 The Tribunal held that the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to the lack of incriminating material, acceptance of additional income without additions, and failure to specify the exact default limb. The AO's discretion in penalty imposition was emphasized, requiring tangible assets for Explanation 5A to apply. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the penalty, emphasizing the need for judicious application of penalty provisions and the insufficiency of oral statements without corroborating evidence for additions or penalties. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jul 2019 10:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383863 The Tribunal held that the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was not sustainable due to the lack of incriminating material, acceptance of additional income without additions, and failure to specify the exact default limb. The AO's discretion in penalty imposition was emphasized, requiring tangible assets for Explanation 5A to apply. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the penalty, emphasizing the need for judicious application of penalty provisions and the insufficiency of oral statements without corroborating evidence for additions or penalties. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383863