https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387509 The Tribunal analyzed the validity of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for inaccurate particulars of income or concealment. It held that penalty related to disclosed income in the return under section 139(1) was unsustainable and deleted. Undisclosed income declared in the return did not attract penalty without specific deeming provisions. Certain additions like trading income estimations did not amount to concealment, resulting in deletion of related penalties. However, penalties for undisclosed sales and disallowed expenditures were sustained. The initiation of penalty proceedings without specifying the default was not adjudicated, and the appeal was partly allowed with adjustments to the penalty amount. en-us Fri, 11 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Oct 2019 16:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387509 The Tribunal analyzed the validity of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) for inaccurate particulars of income or concealment. It held that penalty related to disclosed income in the return under section 139(1) was unsustainable and deleted. Undisclosed income declared in the return did not attract penalty without specific deeming provisions. Certain additions like trading income estimations did not amount to concealment, resulting in deletion of related penalties. However, penalties for undisclosed sales and disallowed expenditures were sustained. The initiation of penalty proceedings without specifying the default was not adjudicated, and the appeal was partly allowed with adjustments to the penalty amount. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 11 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387509