https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8080 The High Court found no evidence, apart from the rejected explanation, to infer that Rs. 20,000 was income derived by the assessee during the relevant accounting period. The court concluded that the finding of concealment by the Tribunal was unsustainable in law. Therefore, the question was answered in the negative, in favor of the assessee, and against the department. The sum of Rs. 20,000 did not represent concealed income of the assessee for the previous year 1954-55 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. en-us Fri, 04 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Mar 2009 11:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8080 The High Court found no evidence, apart from the rejected explanation, to infer that Rs. 20,000 was income derived by the assessee during the relevant accounting period. The court concluded that the finding of concealment by the Tribunal was unsustainable in law. Therefore, the question was answered in the negative, in favor of the assessee, and against the department. The sum of Rs. 20,000 did not represent concealed income of the assessee for the previous year 1954-55 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8080