<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1975 (8) TMI 53 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62055</link>
    <description>Penalty for delayed filing of returns under section 271(1)(a) is not automatic and requires material showing conscious disregard of the statutory obligation. Although the assessee&#039;s explanation based on workload and audit finalisation was found unsatisfactory, the delay was short and there was no evidence of deliberate default. On that basis, the penalty was deleted and the appeals succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 18:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100501" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (8) TMI 53 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62055</link>
      <description>Penalty for delayed filing of returns under section 271(1)(a) is not automatic and requires material showing conscious disregard of the statutory obligation. Although the assessee&#039;s explanation based on workload and audit finalisation was found unsatisfactory, the delay was short and there was no evidence of deliberate default. On that basis, the penalty was deleted and the appeals succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62055</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>