https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22074 The court upheld the penalties imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on a registered partnership firm. The court found no grounds for interference, rejecting the petitioner's argument of lack of jurisdiction and absence of evidence for concealing income particulars. The respondents' disclosure of voluntary income disclosure by the petitioner before detection was countered by highlighting the C.B.I.'s book seizure. The court dismissed the plea for interference, discharged the rule, vacated interim orders, and rejected the rectification application under section 154 due to the absence of apparent mistakes warranting rectification. en-us Fri, 08 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:55:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22074 The court upheld the penalties imposed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on a registered partnership firm. The court found no grounds for interference, rejecting the petitioner's argument of lack of jurisdiction and absence of evidence for concealing income particulars. The respondents' disclosure of voluntary income disclosure by the petitioner before detection was countered by highlighting the C.B.I.'s book seizure. The court dismissed the plea for interference, discharged the rule, vacated interim orders, and rejected the rectification application under section 154 due to the absence of apparent mistakes warranting rectification. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 08 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22074