https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14735 HC upheld the Tribunal's cancellation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for alleged concealment of income arising from understatement of cost of construction. The assessee had disclosed the cost of construction in the return, and there was no statutory requirement to report stage-wise progress. The addition was made solely on the basis of a valuer's report and represented an estimate, not proven deliberate concealment. Relying on its earlier precedent that concealment must be intentional, HC held that the mere difference between the assessee's declared cost and the Department's estimated cost cannot constitute concealment, and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was unwarranted. en-us Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Dec 2025 10:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14735 HC upheld the Tribunal's cancellation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for alleged concealment of income arising from understatement of cost of construction. The assessee had disclosed the cost of construction in the return, and there was no statutory requirement to report stage-wise progress. The addition was made solely on the basis of a valuer's report and represented an estimate, not proven deliberate concealment. Relying on its earlier precedent that concealment must be intentional, HC held that the mere difference between the assessee's declared cost and the Department's estimated cost cannot constitute concealment, and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was unwarranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14735