Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
ITAT held that the assessee's appeal lacks merit. Despite multiple notices through e-filing portal, the assessee failed to respond or provide explanations for non-compliance. The tribunal affirmed the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) based on the assessee's non-disclosure of income discovered during survey proceedings. The ex-parte order was deemed valid, as the right to be heard is not absolute when sufficient opportunities are provided. Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) creates a presumption of concealment in absence of satisfactory explanation. The penalty was correctly levied and confirmed by lower authorities, and the assessee's appeal was consequently dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.