https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12350 The dominant issue was whether penalty under s. 271(1)(c) could be sustained where the assessee, despite not maintaining regular books and allegedly understating income, had furnished particulars and returned income on an estimate that was later enhanced by the AO. The HC held that the Tribunal's factual finding that the assessee's estimate was not the result of gross or wilful negligence, and did not amount to deliberate concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, was supported by material, including the explanation that old vehicles and unremunerative routes depressed earnings. Consequently, penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was held not exigible for the relevant AYs, and the reference was answered against the Revenue. en-us Mon, 12 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 17:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12350 The dominant issue was whether penalty under s. 271(1)(c) could be sustained where the assessee, despite not maintaining regular books and allegedly understating income, had furnished particulars and returned income on an estimate that was later enhanced by the AO. The HC held that the Tribunal's factual finding that the assessee's estimate was not the result of gross or wilful negligence, and did not amount to deliberate concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, was supported by material, including the explanation that old vehicles and unremunerative routes depressed earnings. Consequently, penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was held not exigible for the relevant AYs, and the reference was answered against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 12 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12350