https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456146 ITAT Indore held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified when assessee claimed employee benefit expenses, depreciation, and administrative expenses as revenue expenditure despite no sales during the year. The court ruled that mere disallowance of expenses due to legal provisions does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income. Since the assessee correctly debited expenses in profit and loss account but AO required capitalization due to absence of sales, this disagreement on legal interpretation cannot attract penalty. Relying on SC precedent in Reliance Petroproducts case, ITAT deleted the penalty and allowed the appeal. en-us Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jul 2024 19:57:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456146 ITAT Indore held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified when assessee claimed employee benefit expenses, depreciation, and administrative expenses as revenue expenditure despite no sales during the year. The court ruled that mere disallowance of expenses due to legal provisions does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income. Since the assessee correctly debited expenses in profit and loss account but AO required capitalization due to absence of sales, this disagreement on legal interpretation cannot attract penalty. Relying on SC precedent in Reliance Petroproducts case, ITAT deleted the penalty and allowed the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456146