https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71681 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to cancel the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) for the assessee's undisclosed investment in Balaji Apartments, citing voluntary disclosure and lack of evidence for intentional concealment. Additionally, the penalty for unexplained margin money of Rs. 80,000 for a truck was also cancelled, with the Tribunal accepting the assessee's cash flow statements. The Judicial Member dissented, arguing for penalty imposition due to alleged deliberate concealment. However, the Third Member sided with the majority, affirming the voluntary nature of the disclosure and dismissing the appeal, thereby upholding the CIT(A)'s order. en-us Sat, 18 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Jun 2024 11:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71681 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to cancel the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) for the assessee's undisclosed investment in Balaji Apartments, citing voluntary disclosure and lack of evidence for intentional concealment. Additionally, the penalty for unexplained margin money of Rs. 80,000 for a truck was also cancelled, with the Tribunal accepting the assessee's cash flow statements. The Judicial Member dissented, arguing for penalty imposition due to alleged deliberate concealment. However, the Third Member sided with the majority, affirming the voluntary nature of the disclosure and dismissing the appeal, thereby upholding the CIT(A)'s order. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 18 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71681