https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68439 The Tribunal, after considering the facts and evidence, concluded that the penalty related to the sustained addition of Rs. 70,000 was not justified. It emphasized the lack of direct evidence implicating the assessee in concealing income and noted the daughter's statements regarding the source of ornaments. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s decision and deleted the penalty imposed on the Rs. 70,000 addition, allowing the appeal of the assessee. en-us Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:49:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68439 The Tribunal, after considering the facts and evidence, concluded that the penalty related to the sustained addition of Rs. 70,000 was not justified. It emphasized the lack of direct evidence implicating the assessee in concealing income and noted the daughter's statements regarding the source of ornaments. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s decision and deleted the penalty imposed on the Rs. 70,000 addition, allowing the appeal of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68439