https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259631 The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for unexplained gold ornaments was not justified as the assessees provided a plausible explanation. However, penalties for unexplained cash and investments in KVP, NSC, and SBI Bonds were upheld due to insufficient explanation. The AO was instructed to reassess the penalties accordingly. Appeals were allowed in some cases, partly allowed in others, and rejected in the remaining cases. The order was pronounced in the Ahmedabad Court on 17th April 2015. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Nov 2017 16:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259631 The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for unexplained gold ornaments was not justified as the assessees provided a plausible explanation. However, penalties for unexplained cash and investments in KVP, NSC, and SBI Bonds were upheld due to insufficient explanation. The AO was instructed to reassess the penalties accordingly. Appeals were allowed in some cases, partly allowed in others, and rejected in the remaining cases. The order was pronounced in the Ahmedabad Court on 17th April 2015. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259631