https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249157 Penalty under section 12(3)(b) was sustained because the return and books disclosed material omissions, including underreported deductions and misuse of form XVII, showing that the understatement was not accidental. Penalty under section 22(2) was set aside because the excess tax collection had not been refunded to the assessee by the relevant date, so unjust enrichment could not be established. The decision distinguishes suppression-based penalty, which may stand on factual omissions in assessment records, from an unjust enrichment penalty, which requires proof that the assessee actually retained the excess collection. en-us Fri, 22 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jul 2014 12:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249157 Penalty under section 12(3)(b) was sustained because the return and books disclosed material omissions, including underreported deductions and misuse of form XVII, showing that the understatement was not accidental. Penalty under section 22(2) was set aside because the excess tax collection had not been refunded to the assessee by the relevant date, so unjust enrichment could not be established. The decision distinguishes suppression-based penalty, which may stand on factual omissions in assessment records, from an unjust enrichment penalty, which requires proof that the assessee actually retained the excess collection. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 22 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249157