https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390996 The Tribunal upheld the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) invoking Explanation 5A, finding the assessee concealed income. The Tribunal remanded the issue of whether the land sold was a capital asset back to the Assessing Officer for verification, allowing the second contention for statistical purposes. The appeal was partly allowed, directing further examination on the nature of the land to determine if it falls under the definition of a capital asset. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jan 2020 18:55:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390996 The Tribunal upheld the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) invoking Explanation 5A, finding the assessee concealed income. The Tribunal remanded the issue of whether the land sold was a capital asset back to the Assessing Officer for verification, allowing the second contention for statistical purposes. The appeal was partly allowed, directing further examination on the nature of the land to determine if it falls under the definition of a capital asset. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390996