https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397093 The tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, overturning the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2015-16. The decision emphasized the distinction between quantum and penalty proceedings, stating that not every disallowance automatically attracts a penalty. The tribunal found no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the appellant, leading to the deletion of the penalty. The judgment clarified the legal position on penalties under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, highlighting the importance of evidence and legal basis for imposing penalties. en-us Wed, 22 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Aug 2020 20:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397093 The tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, overturning the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2015-16. The decision emphasized the distinction between quantum and penalty proceedings, stating that not every disallowance automatically attracts a penalty. The tribunal found no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the appellant, leading to the deletion of the penalty. The judgment clarified the legal position on penalties under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, highlighting the importance of evidence and legal basis for imposing penalties. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 22 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397093