https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180889 The appeal challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for a discrepancy in stock valuation between the bank statement and books of accounts. The assessee argued that the inflated stock valuation was for securing a higher loan amount, not for concealing income. The court found that the stock statement to the bank was for loan purposes and did not indicate deliberate concealment. Relying on precedent, the court held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed solely based on figures provided to the bank for loan purposes. Consequently, the penalty was deemed unjustified, and the assessee's appeal was allowed, setting aside the lower authorities' orders. en-us Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Apr 2016 11:04:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180889 The appeal challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for a discrepancy in stock valuation between the bank statement and books of accounts. The assessee argued that the inflated stock valuation was for securing a higher loan amount, not for concealing income. The court found that the stock statement to the bank was for loan purposes and did not indicate deliberate concealment. Relying on precedent, the court held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed solely based on figures provided to the bank for loan purposes. Consequently, the penalty was deemed unjustified, and the assessee's appeal was allowed, setting aside the lower authorities' orders. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180889