https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786836 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained where tax additions are made purely on an estimated basis without concrete evidence of concealment; the article explains that tribunals and higher courts have consistently held that estimation of bogus purchases alone does not satisfy the requirement for levy of penalty, and that appellate deletion of penalty in such circumstances follows this principle. The operative effect is that estimated additions, absent specific corroborative proof of deliberate concealment or misinformation, do not justify imposing penalty under the penal provision, outcome favouring the assessee. en-us Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Feb 2026 08:23:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786836 Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained where tax additions are made purely on an estimated basis without concrete evidence of concealment; the article explains that tribunals and higher courts have consistently held that estimation of bogus purchases alone does not satisfy the requirement for levy of penalty, and that appellate deletion of penalty in such circumstances follows this principle. The operative effect is that estimated additions, absent specific corroborative proof of deliberate concealment or misinformation, do not justify imposing penalty under the penal provision, outcome favouring the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786836