https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196190 The penalty of Rs. 14,000,000/- was sustained despite the return income and finally assessed income being negative. The revised returns filed beyond the specified time limits were deemed invalid, leading to the dismissal of grounds related to excess claims of expenditure on sugar cane price and H&T contractors. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars was upheld, but the matter was remanded for fresh examination to critically assess the reasons for the delay in filing revised returns and the adequacy of explanations for the excess claims. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Wed, 22 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:10:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196190 The penalty of Rs. 14,000,000/- was sustained despite the return income and finally assessed income being negative. The revised returns filed beyond the specified time limits were deemed invalid, leading to the dismissal of grounds related to excess claims of expenditure on sugar cane price and H&T contractors. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars was upheld, but the matter was remanded for fresh examination to critically assess the reasons for the delay in filing revised returns and the adequacy of explanations for the excess claims. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 22 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196190