<?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>2009 (11) TMI 461 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78086</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision to cancel the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) based on the explanation provided by the assessee and the valuation accepted by the Departmental Valuation Officer. The court found no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact by the appellate authority and the Tribunal, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee and dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116223" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 461 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78086</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision to cancel the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) based on the explanation provided by the assessee and the valuation accepted by the Departmental Valuation Officer. The court found no grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact by the appellate authority and the Tribunal, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee and dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78086</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>