https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21609 The High Court held that the burden of proof in cases under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act lies with the assessee to rebut the presumption of concealment with credible evidence. The Court disagreed with the Tribunal's decision to cancel the penalty, emphasizing the need for the assessee to provide cogent evidence to prove no concealment. The Court directed a rehearing to properly assess the burden of proof and the necessity of penalty cancellation, clarifying the legal requirements and evidentiary standards. The judgment favored the Department regarding burden of proof and required the Tribunal to reconsider the penalty cancellation issue. en-us Fri, 03 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:30:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21609 The High Court held that the burden of proof in cases under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act lies with the assessee to rebut the presumption of concealment with credible evidence. The Court disagreed with the Tribunal's decision to cancel the penalty, emphasizing the need for the assessee to provide cogent evidence to prove no concealment. The Court directed a rehearing to properly assess the burden of proof and the necessity of penalty cancellation, clarifying the legal requirements and evidentiary standards. The judgment favored the Department regarding burden of proof and required the Tribunal to reconsider the penalty cancellation issue. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21609