https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27002 The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not legally correct. The court emphasized the lack of concrete evidence to establish income concealment, highlighting the complex nature of the transactions and the need for conclusive proof before imposing penalties. The parties were directed to bear their own costs, and the penalty imposition was deemed unjustified due to insufficient positive evidence of concealment by the assessee-firm. en-us Wed, 29 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 May 2016 17:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27002 The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not legally correct. The court emphasized the lack of concrete evidence to establish income concealment, highlighting the complex nature of the transactions and the need for conclusive proof before imposing penalties. The parties were directed to bear their own costs, and the penalty imposition was deemed unjustified due to insufficient positive evidence of concealment by the assessee-firm. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Feb 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27002