https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99406 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not be sustained where the assessee had disclosed all particulars in the return and the claim was only disallowed as a matter of law. Applying CIT v. Reliance Petro Products Ltd., the ITAT held that concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is required for penalty, and a mere unsustainable claim for document and stamp charges related to increase in authorised share capital does not meet that test. The penalty was deleted and the assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Sat, 02 May 2026 07:40:45 +0530 Sat, 02 May 2026 07:40:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99406 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not be sustained where the assessee had disclosed all particulars in the return and the claim was only disallowed as a matter of law. Applying CIT v. Reliance Petro Products Ltd., the ITAT held that concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars is required for penalty, and a mere unsustainable claim for document and stamp charges related to increase in authorised share capital does not meet that test. The penalty was deleted and the assessee's appeal was allowed. Highlights Income Tax Sat, 02 May 2026 07:40:45 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99406