Penalty for concealed income requires proof of deliberate inaccuracy, not merely unexplained deposits or adverse assessment inferences.

Penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 required proof of concealment of income or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars; a mere failure to explain the source of deposits, or an addition based on rejection of the assessee's explanation and adverse inference from the record, was not enough. On the Tribunal's own reasoning, the evidence did not establish the higher threshold needed for penalty, and the assessee family was therefore not liable to punishment under that provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee family committed a default liable to be punished under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.

Analysis: The Tribunal's finding showed that the addition in assessment rested on the rejection of the assessee's explanation and on inferences from the material on record. For penalty under section 28(1)(c), however, something more than the failure to establish the source of the deposits was required. The material had to show that the assessee had concealed income or deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars. On the Tribunal's own reasoning, the evidence was insufficient to establish those conditions.

Conclusion: The question was answered in the negative, and the assessee was held not liable to penalty under section 28(1)(c).

---