https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67375 The Tribunal found no justification for sustaining the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, emphasizing that the discrepancy in property valuation did not amount to concealment of income. The penalty was canceled as there was no clear evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars, and no proof of fraud or wilful neglect by the assessee. Referring to precedent, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unwarranted, allowing the appeal and overturning the penalty order. en-us Sat, 26 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:39:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67375 The Tribunal found no justification for sustaining the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, emphasizing that the discrepancy in property valuation did not amount to concealment of income. The penalty was canceled as there was no clear evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars, and no proof of fraud or wilful neglect by the assessee. Referring to precedent, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unwarranted, allowing the appeal and overturning the penalty order. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 26 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67375