https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13440 The HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the ITAT's decision to impose a penalty for filing a revised return post-survey under section 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court found the initial return was filed with intent to conceal income, and the revised return was compelled by detected discrepancies. The court emphasized that filing a revised return does not absolve the assessee from penalty if the initial filing was dishonest. Judicial precedents supported the view that concealment involves deliberate actions, and mens rea is crucial. The court concluded no substantial question of law arose, affirming the penalty for the assessee's mala fide conduct. en-us Mon, 10 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Mar 2024 18:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13440 The HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the ITAT's decision to impose a penalty for filing a revised return post-survey under section 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court found the initial return was filed with intent to conceal income, and the revised return was compelled by detected discrepancies. The court emphasized that filing a revised return does not absolve the assessee from penalty if the initial filing was dishonest. Judicial precedents supported the view that concealment involves deliberate actions, and mens rea is crucial. The court concluded no substantial question of law arose, affirming the penalty for the assessee's mala fide conduct. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13440