https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9522 HC ruled for the assessee against the Revenue: the Tribunal erred in upholding penalty under s.271(1)(c) because the omission of an insurance receipt from the return was a bona fide oversight without mens rea, not conscious concealment. The Tribunal also wrongly held that the assessee had to file a cross-objection to challenge adverse findings; rule 27 enables a respondent to support the lower order on any grounds without a cross-objection. The reference was disposed of in favour of the assessee, with no order as to costs. en-us Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Oct 2025 15:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9522 HC ruled for the assessee against the Revenue: the Tribunal erred in upholding penalty under s.271(1)(c) because the omission of an insurance receipt from the return was a bona fide oversight without mens rea, not conscious concealment. The Tribunal also wrongly held that the assessee had to file a cross-objection to challenge adverse findings; rule 27 enables a respondent to support the lower order on any grounds without a cross-objection. The reference was disposed of in favour of the assessee, with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9522