https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397976 The court found that the penalty proceedings lacked jurisdiction due to the notice being issued for a different assessment year without specific mention of concealment of income. It was emphasized that penalty and assessment proceedings are distinct, leading to a conclusion that the penalty order was invalid. Additionally, the court ruled against passing two penalty orders for one assessment year, highlighting that mere disbelief of an explanation is insufficient for imposing a penalty. Ultimately, the court quashed the penalty orders and disposed of the appeal in favor of the assessee. en-us Mon, 31 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Aug 2021 13:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397976 The court found that the penalty proceedings lacked jurisdiction due to the notice being issued for a different assessment year without specific mention of concealment of income. It was emphasized that penalty and assessment proceedings are distinct, leading to a conclusion that the penalty order was invalid. Additionally, the court ruled against passing two penalty orders for one assessment year, highlighting that mere disbelief of an explanation is insufficient for imposing a penalty. Ultimately, the court quashed the penalty orders and disposed of the appeal in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 31 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397976