https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429963 The court upheld the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to set aside the penalty imposed on the respondent under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It was determined that there was no deliberate attempt to conceal income or furnish inaccurate particulars, as the respondent disclosed the income based on advice from their tax consultant. The court also ruled that the compensation received was correctly categorized as a capital receipt, based on professional advice, and dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial question of law in favor of the appellant. en-us Fri, 04 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Sep 2023 10:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429963 The court upheld the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) to set aside the penalty imposed on the respondent under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It was determined that there was no deliberate attempt to conceal income or furnish inaccurate particulars, as the respondent disclosed the income based on advice from their tax consultant. The court also ruled that the compensation received was correctly categorized as a capital receipt, based on professional advice, and dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial question of law in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429963