<?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>1978 (4) TMI 125 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67692</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled that penalties imposed by the Wealth-tax Officer under s. 18(1)(c) were justified based on concealment of income, not merely to give effect to orders under s. 18(2A). The penalties were upheld, and the appeals were allowed, emphasizing that penalties under s. 18(1)(c) are tied to assessment proceedings. The Tribunal dismissed the Reference Applications as no legal questions arose, affirming the appealability of penalties imposed by the Wealth-tax Officer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:56:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (4) TMI 125 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67692</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled that penalties imposed by the Wealth-tax Officer under s. 18(1)(c) were justified based on concealment of income, not merely to give effect to orders under s. 18(2A). The penalties were upheld, and the appeals were allowed, emphasizing that penalties under s. 18(1)(c) are tied to assessment proceedings. The Tribunal dismissed the Reference Applications as no legal questions arose, affirming the appealability of penalties imposed by the Wealth-tax Officer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67692</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>