https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19421 The Tribunal upheld the cancellation of a penalty imposed on a trading firm under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The Commissioner's attempt to rely on the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) for penalty imposition was deemed impermissible as it constituted making a new case. The Tribunal emphasized the need for evidence of fraud or wilful neglect to justify penalties under section 271(1)(c) and clarified that the Explanation is a rule of evidence requiring factual findings before application. The judgment highlights procedural fairness and consistent application of legal provisions in penalty proceedings, setting a precedent for future cases. en-us Mon, 06 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Nov 2009 11:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19421 The Tribunal upheld the cancellation of a penalty imposed on a trading firm under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. The Commissioner's attempt to rely on the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) for penalty imposition was deemed impermissible as it constituted making a new case. The Tribunal emphasized the need for evidence of fraud or wilful neglect to justify penalties under section 271(1)(c) and clarified that the Explanation is a rule of evidence requiring factual findings before application. The judgment highlights procedural fairness and consistent application of legal provisions in penalty proceedings, setting a precedent for future cases. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 06 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19421