<?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>2002 (1) TMI 267 - ITAT DELHI-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63807</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the Department&#039;s appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection in a case concerning penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The Court emphasized the necessity of the Assessing Officer recording satisfaction of concealment in the assessment order before initiating penalty proceedings. As the assessment order lacked this essential element, the penalty order was deemed legally flawed and subsequently canceled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 10:29:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (1) TMI 267 - ITAT DELHI-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63807</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the Department&#039;s appeal and allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection in a case concerning penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The Court emphasized the necessity of the Assessing Officer recording satisfaction of concealment in the assessment order before initiating penalty proceedings. As the assessment order lacked this essential element, the penalty order was deemed legally flawed and subsequently canceled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63807</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>