https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22733 The High Court ruled against the assessee and in favor of the Revenue in Income-tax Reference cases. The Court upheld the Tribunal's findings denying the allowance of a business loss due to dacoity and treating a sum as unexplained investment, citing lack of evidence and discrepancies. It confirmed the Income-tax Officer's jurisdiction to impose penalties post-deletion of a specific section and found the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) applicable, as the assessee failed to rebut the presumption of concealment. en-us Tue, 04 Dec 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:44:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22733 The High Court ruled against the assessee and in favor of the Revenue in Income-tax Reference cases. The Court upheld the Tribunal's findings denying the allowance of a business loss due to dacoity and treating a sum as unexplained investment, citing lack of evidence and discrepancies. It confirmed the Income-tax Officer's jurisdiction to impose penalties post-deletion of a specific section and found the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) applicable, as the assessee failed to rebut the presumption of concealment. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 04 Dec 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22733