https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780506 ITAT DELHI - AT allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty under section 271(1)(c). The tribunal found the impugned penalty was based on an estimated quantum addition made by the AO (and sustained by CIT(A)), and because that addition was inherently subjective the penalty was not warranted. Relying on precedents, the tribunal held the question of levying penalty on estimated additions is settled against imposing penalty and directed deletion of the levy. en-us Tue, 28 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Mar 2026 11:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780506 ITAT DELHI - AT allowed the appeal and deleted the penalty under section 271(1)(c). The tribunal found the impugned penalty was based on an estimated quantum addition made by the AO (and sustained by CIT(A)), and because that addition was inherently subjective the penalty was not warranted. Relying on precedents, the tribunal held the question of levying penalty on estimated additions is settled against imposing penalty and directed deletion of the levy. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 28 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780506