https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56001 The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act was not justified as the findings in the assessment proceedings were not sufficient for penalty imposition. It emphasized that the assessee's declaration of investments did not conclusively prove ownership due to the Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988. Therefore, the penalty was deleted, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 28 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:44:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56001 The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act was not justified as the findings in the assessment proceedings were not sufficient for penalty imposition. It emphasized that the assessee's declaration of investments did not conclusively prove ownership due to the Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988. Therefore, the penalty was deleted, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56001