https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28479 The court held that the assessee was not guilty of an offence under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act as the second revised return was valid and there was no difference between the declared and assessed wealth. The court emphasized that the burden to prove concealment shifts to the Department once the assessee establishes that the incorrect return was not due to fraud or neglect. As a result, the penalty of Rs. 50,000 levied by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was deleted. The court ruled in favor of the assessee and did not address the issue of material for deleting the penalty. en-us Tue, 01 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:58:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28479 The court held that the assessee was not guilty of an offence under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act as the second revised return was valid and there was no difference between the declared and assessed wealth. The court emphasized that the burden to prove concealment shifts to the Department once the assessee establishes that the incorrect return was not due to fraud or neglect. As a result, the penalty of Rs. 50,000 levied by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner was deleted. The court ruled in favor of the assessee and did not address the issue of material for deleting the penalty. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Tue, 01 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28479