Concealment penalty needs proof beyond a confirmed addition; absence of proper charge also defeated the penalty.

Penalty for concealment cannot be sustained merely because the related addition has been confirmed; the revenue must still adduce material showing concealment, and that burden was not met. The Explanation to the penalty provision was also held inapplicable because the notice did not specifically charge the assessee under that Explanation, so the scope of the penalty provision could not be widened beyond the notice. On that reasoning, the penalty was not exigible and was deleted.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty for concealment was sustainable merely because the related addition had been confirmed, and whether the Explanation to the penalty provision was attracted.

Analysis: The confirmed addition by itself was held insufficient to establish concealment. The revenue authorities were required to place further material to prove concealment, and that material was absent. The Explanation to the penalty provision was also held inapplicable because the notice did not specify that the case was covered by it, and the scope of the provision could not be enlarged beyond the charge set out.

Conclusion: The penalty was not exigible and was deleted.

---