https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294272 The ITAT Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 1,40,000 imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2006-07. The tribunal found that the assessee's actions did not amount to concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars, emphasizing that penalties should not be imposed for technical breaches or bonafide beliefs. The tribunal referred to relevant case laws, including the decision in the case of Reliance Petro Products Ltd., and concluded that the penalty was not justified in this case. en-us Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Apr 2021 11:43:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294272 The ITAT Delhi allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 1,40,000 imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2006-07. The tribunal found that the assessee's actions did not amount to concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars, emphasizing that penalties should not be imposed for technical breaches or bonafide beliefs. The tribunal referred to relevant case laws, including the decision in the case of Reliance Petro Products Ltd., and concluded that the penalty was not justified in this case. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294272