Held that mere disallowance of excess claim for want of creation of requisite provision did not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, nor could it be said a false claim. There was no finding by the Assessing Officer in what manner the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Order of CIT(A) is affirmed. (AY.2009-10)
ITO v. Karad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd. (2022) 93 ITR 79 (SN) (Pune)(Trib.)
S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Co-Operative Bank Disallowance of claim-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 36(1)(viia)]