https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462962 The ITAT Delhi held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not be imposed for concealment of income when the additional income was declared in a revised return for a subsequent assessment year. The income, initially disclosed in the revised return for AY 2004-05, was shifted to AY 2003-04 during reassessment. Since the Assessing Officer was aware of the income well before the reassessment and no concealment was found in the present proceedings, penalty proceedings were not justified. The assessee had a bona fide explanation for not disclosing the income earlier due to the expiry of the time limit for revision. Penalty proceedings for the same lapse in AY 2004-05 had been dropped, and the AO could not adopt a contrary stance for AY 2003-04. The appeal was allowed. en-us Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 18:57:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462962 The ITAT Delhi held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not be imposed for concealment of income when the additional income was declared in a revised return for a subsequent assessment year. The income, initially disclosed in the revised return for AY 2004-05, was shifted to AY 2003-04 during reassessment. Since the Assessing Officer was aware of the income well before the reassessment and no concealment was found in the present proceedings, penalty proceedings were not justified. The assessee had a bona fide explanation for not disclosing the income earlier due to the expiry of the time limit for revision. Penalty proceedings for the same lapse in AY 2004-05 had been dropped, and the AO could not adopt a contrary stance for AY 2003-04. The appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462962