https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60577 The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling the penalty of Rs. 99,18,793 under section 158BFA(2) was unjustified. The Tribunal determined the assessee's disclosure of additional income was made in good faith to amend the initial return, not solely detected by the Department. The Tribunal also concluded the CIT(A) was not justified in enhancing the penalty based on the discrepancy between the returned loss and assessed income. The Tribunal underscored that conditional disclosures aimed at avoiding litigation should not attract penalties, and the assessee's actions were bona fide. en-us Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Mar 2024 11:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60577 The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, ruling the penalty of Rs. 99,18,793 under section 158BFA(2) was unjustified. The Tribunal determined the assessee's disclosure of additional income was made in good faith to amend the initial return, not solely detected by the Department. The Tribunal also concluded the CIT(A) was not justified in enhancing the penalty based on the discrepancy between the returned loss and assessed income. The Tribunal underscored that conditional disclosures aimed at avoiding litigation should not attract penalties, and the assessee's actions were bona fide. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60577