https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200549 The High Court upheld the cancellation of penalty under section 271(1)(c) for treating sales tax subsidy as a capital receipt. It found no merit in the revenue's appeal, emphasizing that concealment leading to tax evasion is relevant only under normal assessment procedures, not under Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) provisions. The Court concluded that no concealment can be established when income is assessed under MAT provisions, leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal as no substantial question of law arose from the case. en-us Mon, 04 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2018 21:21:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200549 The High Court upheld the cancellation of penalty under section 271(1)(c) for treating sales tax subsidy as a capital receipt. It found no merit in the revenue's appeal, emphasizing that concealment leading to tax evasion is relevant only under normal assessment procedures, not under Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) provisions. The Court concluded that no concealment can be established when income is assessed under MAT provisions, leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal as no substantial question of law arose from the case. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 04 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200549