https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189216 Under section 25(3) of the Income Tax Act 1952, the phrase "treble the tax which he ought to be charged under this Act" was construed according to its ordinary meaning. The penalty was not confined to the tax attributable to undisclosed income or to the amount omitted in an inaccurate return; instead, it covered the whole tax liability for the relevant year. The court relied on the statutory language, the earlier penalty provisions, and the consolidating character of the Act to reject a narrower "excess tax" reading. The Revenue's position was therefore accepted. en-us Mon, 11 Jan 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Dec 2016 16:13:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189216 Under section 25(3) of the Income Tax Act 1952, the phrase "treble the tax which he ought to be charged under this Act" was construed according to its ordinary meaning. The penalty was not confined to the tax attributable to undisclosed income or to the amount omitted in an inaccurate return; instead, it covered the whole tax liability for the relevant year. The court relied on the statutory language, the earlier penalty provisions, and the consolidating character of the Act to reject a narrower "excess tax" reading. The Revenue's position was therefore accepted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Jan 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189216