https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352590 In a search case covered by Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c), booking bogus purchases in the books was treated as deemed concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, and later reversal of the entries did not neutralise the deeming fiction. The Tribunal therefore sustained penalty on merits because the undisclosed income arose from entries relating to a prior year and remained within the scope of the search-based provision. It also noted that a newly raised objection to the penalty notice for not striking off the irrelevant limb had not been adjudicated below, so that contention was remanded to the first appellate authority for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee. en-us Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 09:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352590 In a search case covered by Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c), booking bogus purchases in the books was treated as deemed concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, and later reversal of the entries did not neutralise the deeming fiction. The Tribunal therefore sustained penalty on merits because the undisclosed income arose from entries relating to a prior year and remained within the scope of the search-based provision. It also noted that a newly raised objection to the penalty notice for not striking off the irrelevant limb had not been adjudicated below, so that contention was remanded to the first appellate authority for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352590