https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777868 ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeals and deleted penalty under s.271(1)(b), holding that the assessee had replied to AO's notices stating the credit-card expenditures were not incurred by the assessee but resulted from misuse by an acquaintance who is absconding, and that the assessee had not paid the card dues. As the AO's order recorded that the assessee provided this explanation (identical facts for two assessment years), the Tribunal found there was no non-compliance with notices and set aside the penalty. en-us Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Sep 2025 08:16:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777868 ITAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeals and deleted penalty under s.271(1)(b), holding that the assessee had replied to AO's notices stating the credit-card expenditures were not incurred by the assessee but resulted from misuse by an acquaintance who is absconding, and that the assessee had not paid the card dues. As the AO's order recorded that the assessee provided this explanation (identical facts for two assessment years), the Tribunal found there was no non-compliance with notices and set aside the penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777868