<?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>1977 (7) TMI 91 - ITAT PATNA-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71141</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal overturned the penalty imposed under s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1972-73. The Tribunal found that the Rs. 5,000 deposit was not proven to be concealed income, emphasizing the lack of concrete evidence to support the claim. Despite rejecting the assessee&#039;s explanation, the Tribunal deemed the penalty unjustified and canceled the order, stating that the mere rejection of an explanation does not necessarily indicate concealment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:47:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109473" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (7) TMI 91 - ITAT PATNA-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71141</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal overturned the penalty imposed under s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1972-73. The Tribunal found that the Rs. 5,000 deposit was not proven to be concealed income, emphasizing the lack of concrete evidence to support the claim. Despite rejecting the assessee&#039;s explanation, the Tribunal deemed the penalty unjustified and canceled the order, stating that the mere rejection of an explanation does not necessarily indicate concealment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71141</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>