Penalty for concealment requires a positive finding; remand was improper where the foundational defect remained uncured.

Penalty for concealment or suppression of turnover cannot be sustained unless there is a positive finding of such concealment or suppression. Once the Tribunal accepted that foundational legal requirement, it was not justified in remanding the matter to the Assessing Authority for a fresh decision, because a remand would improperly permit the department to cure defects in the penalty order. In the absence of the requisite finding, the proper course was to annul the penalty rather than reopen the issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty could be sustained and the matter remanded for fresh decision after the Tribunal had accepted that penalty required a positive finding of concealment or suppression of turnover.

Analysis: The Tribunal accepted the assessee's legal contention that penalty could not be imposed unless there was a positive finding that the turnover had been concealed or suppressed. Having accepted that position, it was not justified in remanding the matter to the Assessing Authority for a fresh decision. A remand in such circumstances would improperly give the department another opportunity to fill gaps in the penalty order, whereas the proper course was to annul the penalty if the foundational finding was absent.

Conclusion: The penalty was held unsustainable and the remand order was quashed; the revision was allowed.

---