https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403442 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing that the penalty was not justified based on the disallowance of purchases as bogus without evidence of concealment or mala-fide intention. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer did not question the genuine sales or payments made by the assessee, leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal on 22nd January 2021. en-us Fri, 22 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:32:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403442 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing that the penalty was not justified based on the disallowance of purchases as bogus without evidence of concealment or mala-fide intention. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer did not question the genuine sales or payments made by the assessee, leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal on 22nd January 2021. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403442