https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764386 ITAT Bangalore upheld penalty under section 270A against assessee for claiming double deduction by treating both capital expenses and depreciation as application of income. Tribunal ruled mens rea is not essential for civil penalty provisions, following Supreme Court precedent in Dharmendra Textile Processors. Despite assessee's option to file revised return and contradictory submissions during assessment proceedings, penalty was justified for willful negligence in income reporting. CIT(A)/NFAC order was set aside, and Revenue's appeal was allowed. en-us Mon, 30 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jan 2025 07:46:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764386 ITAT Bangalore upheld penalty under section 270A against assessee for claiming double deduction by treating both capital expenses and depreciation as application of income. Tribunal ruled mens rea is not essential for civil penalty provisions, following Supreme Court precedent in Dharmendra Textile Processors. Despite assessee's option to file revised return and contradictory submissions during assessment proceedings, penalty was justified for willful negligence in income reporting. CIT(A)/NFAC order was set aside, and Revenue's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764386