<?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>1995 (11) TMI 131 - ITAT DELHI-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64506</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the penalty imposed under section 271B for failure to get accounts audited under section 44AB. The Tribunal found that since the assessee did not maintain any books of account, the obligation to get accounts audited under section 44AB did not arise. Therefore, the penalty was deemed unjustified, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 12:20:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=102947" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (11) TMI 131 - ITAT DELHI-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64506</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the penalty imposed under section 271B for failure to get accounts audited under section 44AB. The Tribunal found that since the assessee did not maintain any books of account, the obligation to get accounts audited under section 44AB did not arise. Therefore, the penalty was deemed unjustified, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64506</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>