https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14394 In considering penalty under s. 271(1)(c) for alleged concealment, the HC held that the Explanation does not create any automatic presumption of fraud or wilful neglect in favour of the Revenue; the Revenue must adduce evidence to substantiate such allegation. The assessee's mere agreement to an addition, without further material, does not establish fraudulent or wilful or negligent concealment. Since the amount was already disclosed in an enclosure filed with the return, there was no concealment. Consequently, the Tribunal's cancellation of penalty was upheld and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, with costs. en-us Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Jul 2026 14:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14394 In considering penalty under s. 271(1)(c) for alleged concealment, the HC held that the Explanation does not create any automatic presumption of fraud or wilful neglect in favour of the Revenue; the Revenue must adduce evidence to substantiate such allegation. The assessee's mere agreement to an addition, without further material, does not establish fraudulent or wilful or negligent concealment. Since the amount was already disclosed in an enclosure filed with the return, there was no concealment. Consequently, the Tribunal's cancellation of penalty was upheld and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, with costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14394