https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59947 The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that there was no concealment of income and no justification for the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c). The Tribunal found that the deposit amount was disclosed in the returns and that the addition for low withdrawals was based on estimation without sufficient material, not constituting concealment. It emphasized the need for evidence of conscious disregard or contumacious conduct to levy a penalty for concealment of income, ultimately concluding that the penalty was unwarranted in this case. en-us Mon, 12 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:16:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59947 The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that there was no concealment of income and no justification for the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c). The Tribunal found that the deposit amount was disclosed in the returns and that the addition for low withdrawals was based on estimation without sufficient material, not constituting concealment. It emphasized the need for evidence of conscious disregard or contumacious conduct to levy a penalty for concealment of income, ultimately concluding that the penalty was unwarranted in this case. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 12 Jan 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59947