https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469872 Penalty under section 270A of the Income-tax Act was upheld as deleted where the disallowance arose only because the deduction claimed for in-house research and development expenditure under section 35(2AB) exceeded the amount later approved in Form 3CL by DSIR. The claim had been made on the basis of the tax auditor's report, and the assessee learned of the short approval only after DSIR communication during assessment. On those facts, the claim was treated as bona fide and unsupported by any material showing misreporting of income or malafide intent; the Revenue's challenge failed and the penalty deletion stood confirmed. en-us Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jul 2026 21:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469872 Penalty under section 270A of the Income-tax Act was upheld as deleted where the disallowance arose only because the deduction claimed for in-house research and development expenditure under section 35(2AB) exceeded the amount later approved in Form 3CL by DSIR. The claim had been made on the basis of the tax auditor's report, and the assessee learned of the short approval only after DSIR communication during assessment. On those facts, the claim was treated as bona fide and unsupported by any material showing misreporting of income or malafide intent; the Revenue's challenge failed and the penalty deletion stood confirmed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469872