https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11393 HC set aside imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c). Duplicate account books seized under s.133 led to addition under s.69A for quantum, but authorities also accepted revised returns of partners for the same amount. The HC found no conclusive finding that the assessee owned the concealed amount; two reasonable views existed. Because ownership was not established independently of the quantum assessment, the Department could not sustain a concealment penalty. Impugned tribunal order was set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 09 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Sep 2025 13:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11393 HC set aside imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c). Duplicate account books seized under s.133 led to addition under s.69A for quantum, but authorities also accepted revised returns of partners for the same amount. The HC found no conclusive finding that the assessee owned the concealed amount; two reasonable views existed. Because ownership was not established independently of the quantum assessment, the Department could not sustain a concealment penalty. Impugned tribunal order was set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11393