1. CIT v. Zoom Communication (P.) Ltd.
191 Taxmann 179High Court2010#927 most cited
What is 1. CIT v. Zoom Communication (P.) Ltd. authority for?
Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is justified when an assessee deliberately and falsely claims expenses. The mere disallowance of a claim in assessment proceedings does not automatically warrant a penalty, unless the claim is found to be false or inaccurate.
116
judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.
Also referred to as
CIT v. Zoom Communication (P.) Ltd. · Zoom Communication · 191 Taxmann 179 · 233 CTR 465 · Section 271(1)(c) · penalty for inaccurate particulars · deliberately false claim · disallowance of expenses · interest on income tax · mens rea
Also reported as
233 CTR 465
Sections most often in play
Issues it is cited on
Judgments citing 1. CIT v. Zoom Communication (P.) Ltd.
Showing 1–20 of 116 · Page 1 of 6