https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10598 The High Court held that the respondent failed to prove no wilful negligence in income disclosure, as the assessed income was more than double the disclosed income, triggering the Explanation to section 271(1)(c). The Tribunal erred in reducing the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for a trading addition of Rs. 18,446 in the assessment year 1979-80. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, answering the question referred against the assessee. No costs were awarded. en-us Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 19 Jul 2009 12:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10598 The High Court held that the respondent failed to prove no wilful negligence in income disclosure, as the assessed income was more than double the disclosed income, triggering the Explanation to section 271(1)(c). The Tribunal erred in reducing the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for a trading addition of Rs. 18,446 in the assessment year 1979-80. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, answering the question referred against the assessee. No costs were awarded. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 23 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10598