https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60580 The Tribunal held that the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were valid as the Assessing Officer (AO) was deemed to have recorded satisfaction during the assessment proceedings. The Tribunal also determined that the penalty for unexplained cash credit was not justified as the assessee had offered explanations supported by loan confirmations. However, the penalty for the discrepancy in recording closing stock was upheld due to the assessee's failure to provide an explanation. en-us Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:35:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60580 The Tribunal held that the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were valid as the Assessing Officer (AO) was deemed to have recorded satisfaction during the assessment proceedings. The Tribunal also determined that the penalty for unexplained cash credit was not justified as the assessee had offered explanations supported by loan confirmations. However, the penalty for the discrepancy in recording closing stock was upheld due to the assessee's failure to provide an explanation. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60580