https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770594 Penalty for concealment under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the quantum addition arose only from an estimated gross profit element on alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal applied the principle that estimated disallowances, without proof of deliberate concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, do not by themselves justify penalty. Relying on the assessee's factual position and coordinate bench precedent, it found no independent basis to sustain the penalty and deleted it. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 May 2025 14:53:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770594 Penalty for concealment under section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the quantum addition arose only from an estimated gross profit element on alleged bogus purchases. The Tribunal applied the principle that estimated disallowances, without proof of deliberate concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, do not by themselves justify penalty. Relying on the assessee's factual position and coordinate bench precedent, it found no independent basis to sustain the penalty and deleted it. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770594