<?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>2006 (5) TMI 163 - ITAT PUNE-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71283</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, deleting the penalties imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. It was held that the assessee&#039;s voluntary declaration of income to avoid litigation did not automatically imply concealment. The burden of proof for concealment was on the Department, which was not established. The Tribunal emphasized that discrepancies in assessments did not necessarily indicate concealment, leading to the deletion of penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2011 12:56:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109612" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 163 - ITAT PUNE-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71283</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, deleting the penalties imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. It was held that the assessee&#039;s voluntary declaration of income to avoid litigation did not automatically imply concealment. The burden of proof for concealment was on the Department, which was not established. The Tribunal emphasized that discrepancies in assessments did not necessarily indicate concealment, leading to the deletion of penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>