<?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>1979 (7) TMI 162 - ITAT PATNA-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71128</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found that the Income Tax Appellate Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to impose the penalty after the deletion of section 274(2) of the Act. The Tribunal also ruled that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the funds from the Hindu Undivided Family were undisclosed income, emphasizing the necessity of concrete evidence before penalizing a taxpayer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:16:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109460" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (7) TMI 162 - ITAT PATNA-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71128</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found that the Income Tax Appellate Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to impose the penalty after the deletion of section 274(2) of the Act. The Tribunal also ruled that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the funds from the Hindu Undivided Family were undisclosed income, emphasizing the necessity of concrete evidence before penalizing a taxpayer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71128</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>