https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12874 Whether penalty under s.271(1)(c) could be sustained without proof of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The HC held that where the addition to income was based on an estimate arising from a perceived profit impact of reduced licence fee, and not on concrete evidence of concealed transactions or inaccurate particulars, the Explanation to s.271(1)(c) required the Revenue to rebut the assessee's discharge of the initial onus. The Tribunal's factual finding that the assessee had explained the results and that no concealment was proved was not contrary to binding precedent. Penalty was held not leviable and the Revenue's challenge failed. en-us Wed, 02 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Dec 2025 14:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12874 Whether penalty under s.271(1)(c) could be sustained without proof of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The HC held that where the addition to income was based on an estimate arising from a perceived profit impact of reduced licence fee, and not on concrete evidence of concealed transactions or inaccurate particulars, the Explanation to s.271(1)(c) required the Revenue to rebut the assessee's discharge of the initial onus. The Tribunal's factual finding that the assessee had explained the results and that no concealment was proved was not contrary to binding precedent. Penalty was held not leviable and the Revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12874