https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39152 The court ruled against the department, favoring the assessee in a case involving penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Emphasizing the burden of proof on the department to establish concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars, the court highlighted the penal nature of such provisions. Despite the burden-shifting Explanation in section 271(1)(c), the court found no evidence of fraud or wilful neglect by the assessee, rejecting the imposition of the penalty. The judgment underscored the necessity of concrete evidence before penalizing in cases of best judgment assessments and estimates. en-us Wed, 22 Jan 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:37:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39152 The court ruled against the department, favoring the assessee in a case involving penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Emphasizing the burden of proof on the department to establish concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars, the court highlighted the penal nature of such provisions. Despite the burden-shifting Explanation in section 271(1)(c), the court found no evidence of fraud or wilful neglect by the assessee, rejecting the imposition of the penalty. The judgment underscored the necessity of concrete evidence before penalizing in cases of best judgment assessments and estimates. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 22 Jan 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39152