Concealment penalty requires proof of the assessee's own conscious suppression of income, not attribution to another person.

Penalty for concealment under section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 requires proof that the person penalised himself consciously concealed particulars of his income. On the stated facts, the taxing authorities attributed the suppression mainly to the assessee's deceased father, and there was no finding that the assessee was personally in charge of the estate or had himself concealed income. In the absence of such a finding, the statutory condition for penalty was not met, and the penalty could not be sustained against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 could be levied on the assessee for the return filed for assessment year 1943-44 when the concealment was attributed to the assessee's deceased father.

Analysis: Liability to penalty under section 28(1)(c) required proof that the person penalised had himself concealed the particulars of his income and that the concealment was conscious. The finding of the taxing authorities was that the father was mainly responsible for the suppression of income. There was no finding that the assessee himself was in charge of the estate or that the guardians were responsible for any concealment. In the absence of a finding that the assessee personally concealed his income, the statutory condition for penalty was not satisfied.

Conclusion: Penalty under section 28(1)(c) could not be sustained against the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty for concealment under section 28(1)(c) can be imposed only where the person penalised is shown to have consciously concealed his own income.

---