https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788635 A conscious and deliberate decision not to file the quantum appeal was held not to amount to sufficient cause for condonation of an inordinate delay under section 253(5), so the quantum appeal remained time-barred. On penalty, the tribunal treated proceedings under section 270A as distinct from assessment and held that confirmation of the disallowance under section 80G did not by itself justify penalty. In the absence of findings of suppression, false entries, fabricated evidence, or other factual falsity, the ingredients of misreporting under section 270A(9) were not made out and the claim was treated as bona fide. The penalty was therefore deleted. en-us Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Mar 2026 10:57:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788635 A conscious and deliberate decision not to file the quantum appeal was held not to amount to sufficient cause for condonation of an inordinate delay under section 253(5), so the quantum appeal remained time-barred. On penalty, the tribunal treated proceedings under section 270A as distinct from assessment and held that confirmation of the disallowance under section 80G did not by itself justify penalty. In the absence of findings of suppression, false entries, fabricated evidence, or other factual falsity, the ingredients of misreporting under section 270A(9) were not made out and the claim was treated as bona fide. The penalty was therefore deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788635