https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468182 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held not leviable where the addition arose only from disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash payments above the prescribed limit. The assessee had disclosed the payments and supporting particulars, and there was no finding of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The disallowance was treated as a statutory consequence of the cash-payment restriction, not as proof that the expenditure claim was false or bogus. As penalty under section 271(1)(c) requires concealment or inaccurate particulars, the penalty could not be sustained. en-us Mon, 03 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Apr 2026 08:48:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468182 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held not leviable where the addition arose only from disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash payments above the prescribed limit. The assessee had disclosed the payments and supporting particulars, and there was no finding of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. The disallowance was treated as a statutory consequence of the cash-payment restriction, not as proof that the expenditure claim was false or bogus. As penalty under section 271(1)(c) requires concealment or inaccurate particulars, the penalty could not be sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 03 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468182