https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753421 The ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied where income addition is sustained on estimated basis. The assessee faced disallowance of bogus purchases, with CIT(A) restricting it to 17.5% and Tribunal further reducing it to 8%. The ITAT ruled that adhoc disallowance of purchases does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars of income under section 271(1)(c). Since the AO did not doubt sales but only disallowed bogus purchases, relying on Nikunj Eximp Enterprises precedent, the ITAT set aside CIT(A)'s order and directed deletion of penalty, allowing the appeal in favor of the assessee. en-us Wed, 29 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2024 11:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753421 The ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied where income addition is sustained on estimated basis. The assessee faced disallowance of bogus purchases, with CIT(A) restricting it to 17.5% and Tribunal further reducing it to 8%. The ITAT ruled that adhoc disallowance of purchases does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars of income under section 271(1)(c). Since the AO did not doubt sales but only disallowed bogus purchases, relying on Nikunj Eximp Enterprises precedent, the ITAT set aside CIT(A)'s order and directed deletion of penalty, allowing the appeal in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753421