https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39135 The court held that the Tribunal erred in deleting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by applying outdated legal principles from a previous case without considering the post-amendment legal framework. The court emphasized the importance of the Explanation added to section 271(1)(c) from April 1, 1964, which shifted the burden of proof to the assessee to demonstrate non-concealment. The judgment clarified the interpretation of penalty provisions post-amendment and highlighted the significance of statutory changes in determining tax liabilities. en-us Fri, 18 Jan 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:50:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39135 The court held that the Tribunal erred in deleting the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by applying outdated legal principles from a previous case without considering the post-amendment legal framework. The court emphasized the importance of the Explanation added to section 271(1)(c) from April 1, 1964, which shifted the burden of proof to the assessee to demonstrate non-concealment. The judgment clarified the interpretation of penalty provisions post-amendment and highlighted the significance of statutory changes in determining tax liabilities. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Jan 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39135