https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764844 The court held that the penalty order dated 14.07.2016 was time-barred as it was issued beyond the permissible period, rendering it invalid. The CIT(A)'s decision to delete the additions made by the AO was upheld due to a lack of evidence supporting the AO's claims regarding land characterization and financial transactions. Additionally, the penalty imposed for alleged TDS non-compliance was deemed unjustified and was set aside, as the court found no evidence of non-compliance in the financial statements. The court emphasized the importance of timely and accurate evidence in sustaining penalty orders. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jan 2025 08:10:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764844 The court held that the penalty order dated 14.07.2016 was time-barred as it was issued beyond the permissible period, rendering it invalid. The CIT(A)'s decision to delete the additions made by the AO was upheld due to a lack of evidence supporting the AO's claims regarding land characterization and financial transactions. Additionally, the penalty imposed for alleged TDS non-compliance was deemed unjustified and was set aside, as the court found no evidence of non-compliance in the financial statements. The court emphasized the importance of timely and accurate evidence in sustaining penalty orders. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764844