<?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>1980 (5) TMI 63 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65122</link>
    <description>Penalty for concealment cannot be sustained merely because the related addition has been confirmed; the revenue must still adduce material showing concealment, and that burden was not met. The Explanation to the penalty provision was also held inapplicable because the notice did not specifically charge the assessee under that Explanation, so the scope of the penalty provision could not be widened beyond the notice. On that reasoning, the penalty was not exigible and was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 May 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Feb 2011 14:28:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=103562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (5) TMI 63 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65122</link>
      <description>Penalty for concealment cannot be sustained merely because the related addition has been confirmed; the revenue must still adduce material showing concealment, and that burden was not met. The Explanation to the penalty provision was also held inapplicable because the notice did not specifically charge the assessee under that Explanation, so the scope of the penalty provision could not be widened beyond the notice. On that reasoning, the penalty was not exigible and was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 May 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65122</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>