https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755499 ITAT Mumbai-AT ruled in favor of the assessee regarding penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee maintained separate books for proprietorship concerns, made investments from own capital, and provided all dividend income details. The tribunal held that failure to make disallowance under Section 14A or compute administrative expenses for exempt income does not constitute concealment or inaccurate particulars. Following SC precedent in CIT v. Reliance Petro Products, making incorrect legal claims cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The penalty was deleted as revenue failed to prove concealment or inaccurate income particulars. en-us Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jul 2024 08:23:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755499 ITAT Mumbai-AT ruled in favor of the assessee regarding penalty under Section 271(1)(c). The assessee maintained separate books for proprietorship concerns, made investments from own capital, and provided all dividend income details. The tribunal held that failure to make disallowance under Section 14A or compute administrative expenses for exempt income does not constitute concealment or inaccurate particulars. Following SC precedent in CIT v. Reliance Petro Products, making incorrect legal claims cannot amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars. The penalty was deleted as revenue failed to prove concealment or inaccurate income particulars. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755499