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 allowed the appeal and set aside penalty under s.271(1)(c), holding that disclosure of additional income during survey, subsequently reflected in the return filed under s.139(1) and in the return under s.153A and accepted by the AO, does not constitute concealment as a matter of law. The Tribunal applied the strict construction applicable to penal provisions and held the decisive test is whether the return contains complete particulars of income. Absent omission in the return and independent corroborative evidence of concealment, addition or penalty based solely on a survey disclosure (a loose paper) is unsustainable. The penalty was therefore quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.