https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63028 The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi-A upheld the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reversing the deletion by the AAC, B Range, Bareilly. The case involved a registered firm where gold and ornaments were seized, leading to an addition under section 69 of the Act. The burden of proof rested with the assessee to explain the acquisition source, with the Tribunal emphasizing the need for a satisfactory explanation to avoid penalty for concealment of income. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the explanations provided by the assessee regarding the seized items and dismissed the argument of a statement made under duress by a partner, ultimately ruling in favor of the revenue. en-us Mon, 23 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Jan 2011 13:48:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63028 The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi-A upheld the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reversing the deletion by the AAC, B Range, Bareilly. The case involved a registered firm where gold and ornaments were seized, leading to an addition under section 69 of the Act. The burden of proof rested with the assessee to explain the acquisition source, with the Tribunal emphasizing the need for a satisfactory explanation to avoid penalty for concealment of income. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the explanations provided by the assessee regarding the seized items and dismissed the argument of a statement made under duress by a partner, ultimately ruling in favor of the revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 23 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63028