https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423019 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271G for the Assessee in a case involving non-furnishing of segment-wise profitability details. The Tribunal found that the Assessee substantially complied with providing information for determining the arm's length price, despite not maintaining separate books of account for AE and non-AE transactions. The decision was influenced by a similar case precedent where practical difficulties in the diamond industry justified penalty deletion. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty deletion based on the Assessee's compliance with the Transfer Pricing Officer's requirements. en-us Wed, 25 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 May 2022 16:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423019 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty under section 271G for the Assessee in a case involving non-furnishing of segment-wise profitability details. The Tribunal found that the Assessee substantially complied with providing information for determining the arm's length price, despite not maintaining separate books of account for AE and non-AE transactions. The decision was influenced by a similar case precedent where practical difficulties in the diamond industry justified penalty deletion. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty deletion based on the Assessee's compliance with the Transfer Pricing Officer's requirements. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423019