https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20825 After the 1976 amendment, Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) operates as a rule of evidence: where an assessee cannot substantiate an explanation for an addition, the amount may be deemed concealed income unless the explanation is shown to be bona fide and all material facts were disclosed. Assessment and penalty proceedings remain distinct, but the assessee bears the initial burden to rebut the statutory presumption because the relevant facts are within its special knowledge. Mere rejection of the explanation is not enough by itself; however, absent rebuttal material, the deeming provision applies. The deletion of penalty was therefore not justified and the Revenue's contention succeeded. en-us Mon, 08 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:52:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20825 After the 1976 amendment, Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) operates as a rule of evidence: where an assessee cannot substantiate an explanation for an addition, the amount may be deemed concealed income unless the explanation is shown to be bona fide and all material facts were disclosed. Assessment and penalty proceedings remain distinct, but the assessee bears the initial burden to rebut the statutory presumption because the relevant facts are within its special knowledge. Mere rejection of the explanation is not enough by itself; however, absent rebuttal material, the deeming provision applies. The deletion of penalty was therefore not justified and the Revenue's contention succeeded. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20825