https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442886 The Tribunal allowed all three appeals filed by the assessee, leading to the deletion of penalties and additions imposed under Sections 271(1)(c) and 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the protective addition on account of alleged bogus sales was not justified as a substantive addition had already been made in the hands of another party. The Tribunal also emphasized that penalties cannot be levied protectively, in line with the Gujarat High Court judgment in Bhailal Manilal Patel vs. CIT. en-us Mon, 28 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Sep 2023 10:03:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442886 The Tribunal allowed all three appeals filed by the assessee, leading to the deletion of penalties and additions imposed under Sections 271(1)(c) and 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the protective addition on account of alleged bogus sales was not justified as a substantive addition had already been made in the hands of another party. The Tribunal also emphasized that penalties cannot be levied protectively, in line with the Gujarat High Court judgment in Bhailal Manilal Patel vs. CIT. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 28 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442886