Concealment penalty requires proof of deliberate suppression; a mere assessment addition is insufficient to sustain section 271(1)(c) penalty.

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where it rested only on an addition made in quantum assessment for unaccounted sales. The governing principle applied was that concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars requires material showing a deliberate or conscious act by the assessee; a mere addition in assessment is not enough. As the Revenue produced no evidence of deliberate suppression of receipts or false particulars, the penalty was not exigible and was deleted.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was sustainable on the basis of the addition made in assessment for unaccounted sales.

Analysis: Penalty for concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars requires more than the mere making of an addition in assessment. The governing principle is that there must be material showing a deliberate or conscious act of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. On the facts found, the Revenue did not bring any material to show that the assessee had deliberately suppressed business receipts or furnished false particulars; the addition in quantum proceedings, by itself, was insufficient to justify penalty.

Conclusion: The penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not exigible and was directed to be deleted, in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained solely because an income addition is made in assessment; it requires material establishing conscious concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars.

---