<?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>2003 (3) TMI 334 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71859</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the penalty imposed under section 158BFA(2) of the IT Act unjustified as there was no difference between the declared and assessed undisclosed income. Emphasizing that penalizing in such a scenario would be unjust, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the penalty, accepting the appeal of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110180" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 334 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71859</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the penalty imposed under section 158BFA(2) of the IT Act unjustified as there was no difference between the declared and assessed undisclosed income. Emphasizing that penalizing in such a scenario would be unjust, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the penalty, accepting the appeal of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71859</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>