https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7619 Penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 is distinct from assessment proceedings and requires a separate satisfaction in the penalty stage that concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars has been proved. An assessment order may be relevant, but it is not by itself sufficient to sustain penalty. The burden remains on the department to adduce independent evidence of concealment, and the assessee's failure to explain credits at assessment does not automatically establish the penalty ingredients. On the stated facts, penalty was held invalid because no independent evidence was produced. en-us Wed, 23 Jul 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7619 Penalty under section 28(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 is distinct from assessment proceedings and requires a separate satisfaction in the penalty stage that concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars has been proved. An assessment order may be relevant, but it is not by itself sufficient to sustain penalty. The burden remains on the department to adduce independent evidence of concealment, and the assessee's failure to explain credits at assessment does not automatically establish the penalty ingredients. On the stated facts, penalty was held invalid because no independent evidence was produced. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 23 Jul 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7619