https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69770 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the assessment addition for unexplained investment in property could not, by itself, prove conscious concealment of income. The assessee failed to conclusively explain the source of investment, but the material remained insufficient to establish deliberate concealment for penalty purposes. Because the property stood in the wife's name and the assessment rested largely on suspicion and surrounding circumstances, the penalty was deleted and that deletion was upheld in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 31 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:25:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69770 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the assessment addition for unexplained investment in property could not, by itself, prove conscious concealment of income. The assessee failed to conclusively explain the source of investment, but the material remained insufficient to establish deliberate concealment for penalty purposes. Because the property stood in the wife's name and the assessment rested largely on suspicion and surrounding circumstances, the penalty was deleted and that deletion was upheld in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 31 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69770