https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464808 ITAT held that penalty under s.271(1)(c) could not be sustained where the assessing officer framed the proceedings for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income but ultimately levied penalty for concealment of income; higher authority decisions treat those charges as distinct and non-framing of the specific charge vitiates penalty proceedings. Relying on first appellate authority and absence of contrary higher court precedent, ITAT found no infirmity in allowing the assessee's appeal and setting aside the penalty. en-us Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Nov 2025 15:39:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464808 ITAT held that penalty under s.271(1)(c) could not be sustained where the assessing officer framed the proceedings for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income but ultimately levied penalty for concealment of income; higher authority decisions treat those charges as distinct and non-framing of the specific charge vitiates penalty proceedings. Relying on first appellate authority and absence of contrary higher court precedent, ITAT found no infirmity in allowing the assessee's appeal and setting aside the penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464808