https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36853 The case involved the assessment of an individual's income from latex trading for the year 1970-71. The Income Tax Officer rejected accounts, estimated a gross profit rate of 17.5%, and imposed a penalty. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the additions, but the Tribunal reduced them due to lack of evidence. The High Court allowed post-assessment evidence in penalty proceedings, supporting penalty imposition under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The court ruled against the assessee, upholding the penalty imposition based on inflated expenses and broad penalty provisions, despite the Tribunal's differing view on evidence admissibility. en-us Mon, 13 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 10:30:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36853 The case involved the assessment of an individual's income from latex trading for the year 1970-71. The Income Tax Officer rejected accounts, estimated a gross profit rate of 17.5%, and imposed a penalty. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the additions, but the Tribunal reduced them due to lack of evidence. The High Court allowed post-assessment evidence in penalty proceedings, supporting penalty imposition under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The court ruled against the assessee, upholding the penalty imposition based on inflated expenses and broad penalty provisions, despite the Tribunal's differing view on evidence admissibility. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36853