https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17686 Penalty proceedings under the Gift-tax Act are quasi-judicial and cannot be determined by mechanically adopting assessment findings; the authority must independently examine the material and record a specific finding of conscious concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars. At the stage of a reference application under section 26(3), the court considers only whether a question of law arises from the Tribunal's order and whether the Tribunal wrongly refused reference, not the ultimate merits of the proposed question. On that basis, the Tribunal's refusal was unjustified because the penalty reasoning raised a referable question of law, and the Revenue's request for reference was allowed. en-us Wed, 24 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 11:43:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17686 Penalty proceedings under the Gift-tax Act are quasi-judicial and cannot be determined by mechanically adopting assessment findings; the authority must independently examine the material and record a specific finding of conscious concealment or deliberate furnishing of inaccurate particulars. At the stage of a reference application under section 26(3), the court considers only whether a question of law arises from the Tribunal's order and whether the Tribunal wrongly refused reference, not the ultimate merits of the proposed question. On that basis, the Tribunal's refusal was unjustified because the penalty reasoning raised a referable question of law, and the Revenue's request for reference was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17686