https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9201 Penalty for concealment under section 28(1)(c) was unsustainable because the revenue failed to prove deliberate concealment or that the disputed house property and diamonds were the assessee's exclusive assets. The assessee supported the claim that the properties were joint family assets inherited from the father with affidavits from brothers and a partition deed, and the revenue did not dispute the joint family arrangement or the genuineness of the deed. Mere timing of the partition deed after assessment proceedings had begun did not by itself negate its evidentiary value. The penalty was therefore set aside. en-us Tue, 13 Mar 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9201 Penalty for concealment under section 28(1)(c) was unsustainable because the revenue failed to prove deliberate concealment or that the disputed house property and diamonds were the assessee's exclusive assets. The assessee supported the claim that the properties were joint family assets inherited from the father with affidavits from brothers and a partition deed, and the revenue did not dispute the joint family arrangement or the genuineness of the deed. Mere timing of the partition deed after assessment proceedings had begun did not by itself negate its evidentiary value. The penalty was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Mar 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9201