https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68542 The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jodhpur combined penalty appeals for assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93, involving disallowed expenses and penalties under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income. The Tribunal found that penalties were unjustified, emphasizing the need for clear evidence of concealment or fraudulent intent. They highlighted the distinction between assessment and penalty proceedings, requiring stronger proof for penalties. The Tribunal's decision to disallow penalties was supported by the estimation of income in quantum appeals, ultimately allowing both penalty appeals of the assessee. en-us Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jun 2012 10:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68542 The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jodhpur combined penalty appeals for assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93, involving disallowed expenses and penalties under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income. The Tribunal found that penalties were unjustified, emphasizing the need for clear evidence of concealment or fraudulent intent. They highlighted the distinction between assessment and penalty proceedings, requiring stronger proof for penalties. The Tribunal's decision to disallow penalties was supported by the estimation of income in quantum appeals, ultimately allowing both penalty appeals of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68542