https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760605 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c). The case involved disallowance of long-term capital loss from a slump sale transaction. The AO alleged the transaction was an afterthought to evade taxes. However, the tribunal found no tax evasion occurred due to the capital loss, and the AO merely disagreed with the business transaction where a proprietary concern was taken over by a company with the assessee as majority shareholder. Following the SC precedent in Reliance Petroproducts, the tribunal held that making an unsustainable claim does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars, making the penalty unjustifiable. en-us Mon, 21 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Oct 2024 10:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760605 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c). The case involved disallowance of long-term capital loss from a slump sale transaction. The AO alleged the transaction was an afterthought to evade taxes. However, the tribunal found no tax evasion occurred due to the capital loss, and the AO merely disagreed with the business transaction where a proprietary concern was taken over by a company with the assessee as majority shareholder. Following the SC precedent in Reliance Petroproducts, the tribunal held that making an unsustainable claim does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars, making the penalty unjustifiable. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 21 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760605