<?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 (10) TMI 80 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67532</link>
    <description>The Tribunal canceled the penalty of Rs. 70,000 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the case. The Tribunal found that the assessee successfully rebutted the presumption of concealment, emphasizing the lack of sufficient evidence provided by the Assessing Officer to uphold the penalty. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that the voluntary addition of Rs. 1 lakh by the assessee was not an admission of undisclosed income but a measure to avoid prolonged litigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:27:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105967" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 80 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67532</link>
      <description>The Tribunal canceled the penalty of Rs. 70,000 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the case. The Tribunal found that the assessee successfully rebutted the presumption of concealment, emphasizing the lack of sufficient evidence provided by the Assessing Officer to uphold the penalty. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that the voluntary addition of Rs. 1 lakh by the assessee was not an admission of undisclosed income but a measure to avoid prolonged litigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67532</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>