https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7359 The High Court of Madras ruled in favor of the assessee, a partnership firm, in a case concerning the assessment of undisclosed income for the assessment year 1958-59. The court held that the penalty imposed under section 28(1)(c) was not justified as the revenue failed to prove that the deposits constituted income of the relevant year. The court clarified that adding income based on unexplained credit entries for assessment purposes does not automatically establish concealment of income. It emphasized the need for additional evidence to prove the offense under section 28(1)(c) and upheld the Tribunal's decision, highlighting the burden of proof on the revenue. en-us Mon, 31 Jul 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7359 The High Court of Madras ruled in favor of the assessee, a partnership firm, in a case concerning the assessment of undisclosed income for the assessment year 1958-59. The court held that the penalty imposed under section 28(1)(c) was not justified as the revenue failed to prove that the deposits constituted income of the relevant year. The court clarified that adding income based on unexplained credit entries for assessment purposes does not automatically establish concealment of income. It emphasized the need for additional evidence to prove the offense under section 28(1)(c) and upheld the Tribunal's decision, highlighting the burden of proof on the revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 31 Jul 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7359