S. 271B : Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited–Civil contractor– Failure to keep and maintain books of account-No prescribed format for maintenance of books of account-Levy of penalty is not justified either u/s 271A or u/s 271B of the Act. [S. 44AB, 271A]

S. 271AAB : Penalty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-In statement admits undisclosed income and specifies manner in which such income derived-No undisclosed income-Penalty not leviable. [S. 132(4)]

S. 271AAB : Penalty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-Concealment–Search and seizure–Undisclosed income-Disallowances cannot automatically lead to penalty–levy of 10% penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 132, 271(1)(c)]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment-Receipt of additional income not disclosed prior to search-Levy of penalty is justified–AO not sure on which count he intends to levy penalty-Two situations contradictory to each other-Returned and assessed income the Same and revised income accepted-Levy of penalty is not justified. [S. 132, 153A]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Long term capital gains-Search-Addition on account of difference between the rate adopted by assessee and department-levy of penalty is held to be not justified. [S. 132, 139, 153A, 271(1)(c), Expl. 5A, 274].

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Vague allegation-Not specifying specific charge-0levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 274]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment-Inapplicable words in notice not struck off-Penalty order not specifying exactly under which limb penalty is levied-Penalty is held to be unjustified. [S. 274]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–Survey–Surrender of income– No difference between returned income and assessed income– Penalty is not leviable–As regards non disclosure of rental income-Penalty is leviable. [S. 22, 133A]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Sale of fixed asset-Slump sale-Amount not offered as income-Levy of penalty is justified-Not striking off relevant limb of notice–Reply filed in response to notice –Presumption is that the assessee has understood the notice. [S. 50B, 50C, 274]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limitation-Doctrine of merger-Revision on issues not subject matter of reassessment but pertaining to original assessment-Limitation would run from date of order of original assessment and not from date of order of reassessment-Revision barred by limitation. [S. 143(3), 147, 263(2)]