<?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 (8) TMI 464 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116906</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271B for failure to get accounts audited under section 44AB was held unsustainable where the assessee was in the first year of business, turnover was only slightly above the audit threshold, and the lapse was due to ignorance of the requirement. The Tribunal treated the default as bona fide and not mala fide, and applied the reasonable-cause protection under section 273B. On that basis, the penalty was cancelled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2012 17:23:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153904" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 464 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116906</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271B for failure to get accounts audited under section 44AB was held unsustainable where the assessee was in the first year of business, turnover was only slightly above the audit threshold, and the lapse was due to ignorance of the requirement. The Tribunal treated the default as bona fide and not mala fide, and applied the reasonable-cause protection under section 273B. On that basis, the penalty was cancelled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116906</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>