<?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>1992 (3) TMI 129 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66060</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income by the assessee, ruling that the omission of credit note amounts was intentional to defer income recognition and reduce tax liability. Despite the addition being agreed upon later, the Tribunal held that the penalty was justified as it was not an immediate and voluntary agreement. Judicial precedents cited by the assessee were deemed inapplicable, and the Tribunal emphasized that penalties can be sustained even for agreed additions, based on concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the validity of the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:41:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=104496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (3) TMI 129 - ITAT HYDERABAD-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66060</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income by the assessee, ruling that the omission of credit note amounts was intentional to defer income recognition and reduce tax liability. Despite the addition being agreed upon later, the Tribunal held that the penalty was justified as it was not an immediate and voluntary agreement. Judicial precedents cited by the assessee were deemed inapplicable, and the Tribunal emphasized that penalties can be sustained even for agreed additions, based on concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the validity of the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>