https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15165 The amended penalty regime under section 271(1)(c) and Explanation 1 deems assessed additions to represent concealed income where the assessee fails to give a credible explanation, gives a false explanation, or cannot substantiate the explanation, unless bona fides and full disclosure are shown. Penalty proceedings remain distinct from assessment, but the assessee bears the initial burden to rebut the statutory presumption. On the facts, the assessee's explanation for the inflated purchase bill was inconsistent with his own letters and admissions, which supported inflation of the purchase price, retention of the amount in cash, and its entry in the proprietary concern's books. The Tribunal's contrary view was based on conjecture and irrelevant material, so cancellation of the penalty was not justified. en-us Sat, 18 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Aug 2009 14:01:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15165 The amended penalty regime under section 271(1)(c) and Explanation 1 deems assessed additions to represent concealed income where the assessee fails to give a credible explanation, gives a false explanation, or cannot substantiate the explanation, unless bona fides and full disclosure are shown. Penalty proceedings remain distinct from assessment, but the assessee bears the initial burden to rebut the statutory presumption. On the facts, the assessee's explanation for the inflated purchase bill was inconsistent with his own letters and admissions, which supported inflation of the purchase price, retention of the amount in cash, and its entry in the proprietary concern's books. The Tribunal's contrary view was based on conjecture and irrelevant material, so cancellation of the penalty was not justified. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 18 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15165