<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1961 (6) TMI 21 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175490</link>
    <description>Penalty for concealment turns on the assessee&#039;s conduct at the time the original return was filed, not merely on whether full particulars were later supplied before assessment. A revised return under section 22(3) can protect a bona fide omission or wrong statement, but it does not cure a deliberate false return or conscious suppression of income. Where later disclosure is prompted by departmental scrutiny and is not truly voluntary, the original default remains operative. On those principles, the concealment penalty under section 28(1)(c) was properly sustained because the assessee had either concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars in the first instance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jul 2017 14:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=406340" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1961 (6) TMI 21 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175490</link>
      <description>Penalty for concealment turns on the assessee&#039;s conduct at the time the original return was filed, not merely on whether full particulars were later supplied before assessment. A revised return under section 22(3) can protect a bona fide omission or wrong statement, but it does not cure a deliberate false return or conscious suppression of income. Where later disclosure is prompted by departmental scrutiny and is not truly voluntary, the original default remains operative. On those principles, the concealment penalty under section 28(1)(c) was properly sustained because the assessee had either concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars in the first instance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 1961 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175490</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>