https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770240 ITAT Jaipur held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not be sustained and directed its deletion. The AO had initiated penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars but the notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) failed to specify clear grounds; moreover, reassessment proceedings accepted details of the land transactions and purchases. The Tribunal found that mere disallowance of claimed expenditure does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, and decided in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 05 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Oct 2025 11:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770240 ITAT Jaipur held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not be sustained and directed its deletion. The AO had initiated penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars but the notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) failed to specify clear grounds; moreover, reassessment proceedings accepted details of the land transactions and purchases. The Tribunal found that mere disallowance of claimed expenditure does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, and decided in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770240