https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98179 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was examined issue-wise against the assessee's claims in transfer pricing, GDR expenses, MODVAT expenses, foreign exchange derivative losses, PF and ESIC, foreign exchange gain, and TDS reconciliation differences. The Tribunal treated claims already rejected in quantum proceedings, or unsupported by evidence, as lacking bona fide and upheld penalty where the assessee failed to show good faith, due diligence, or full disclosure. It found the foreign exchange derivative loss to be a bona fide business deduction claim and deleted the linked penalty because the underlying quantum disallowance had not survived. The appeal was thus partly allowed for statistical purposes, with one remanded penalty issue for fresh consideration. en-us Sat, 28 Mar 2026 08:57:27 +0530 Sat, 28 Mar 2026 08:57:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98179 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was examined issue-wise against the assessee's claims in transfer pricing, GDR expenses, MODVAT expenses, foreign exchange derivative losses, PF and ESIC, foreign exchange gain, and TDS reconciliation differences. The Tribunal treated claims already rejected in quantum proceedings, or unsupported by evidence, as lacking bona fide and upheld penalty where the assessee failed to show good faith, due diligence, or full disclosure. It found the foreign exchange derivative loss to be a bona fide business deduction claim and deleted the linked penalty because the underlying quantum disallowance had not survived. The appeal was thus partly allowed for statistical purposes, with one remanded penalty issue for fresh consideration. Highlights Income Tax Sat, 28 Mar 2026 08:57:27 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98179