https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285580 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A) decision, ruling that the excess depreciation claim made by the appellant was in good faith and did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars under section 271(1)(c). The ITAT found the claim to be based on a debatable issue, supported by expert advice and tax audit certification, with no fraudulent intent to evade tax. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer was deemed unwarranted, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jan 2020 16:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285580 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A) decision, ruling that the excess depreciation claim made by the appellant was in good faith and did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars under section 271(1)(c). The ITAT found the claim to be based on a debatable issue, supported by expert advice and tax audit certification, with no fraudulent intent to evade tax. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer was deemed unwarranted, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285580