https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24175 Where returned income exceeded 80% of assessed income, the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) did not apply and the burden remained on the Department to justify penalty. The Tribunal erred by placing the burden on the assessee and sustaining penalty merely because no satisfactory explanation was given. The penalty order was therefore not sustainable without a fresh appraisal of the record in accordance with law, and the matter was remitted for reconsideration. en-us Thu, 06 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:04:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24175 Where returned income exceeded 80% of assessed income, the Explanation to section 271(1)(c) did not apply and the burden remained on the Department to justify penalty. The Tribunal erred by placing the burden on the assessee and sustaining penalty merely because no satisfactory explanation was given. The penalty order was therefore not sustainable without a fresh appraisal of the record in accordance with law, and the matter was remitted for reconsideration. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24175