<?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 (2) TMI 503 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121550</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal. The penalty related to the suppressed labor receipts was upheld, while the penalty related to the declared gross receipts was deleted. The Tribunal emphasized the stringent nature of penalty provisions under section 271(1)(c) for deterring economic offenses and upheld penalties in cases of deliberate income concealment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:17:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158544" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 503 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121550</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal. The penalty related to the suppressed labor receipts was upheld, while the penalty related to the declared gross receipts was deleted. The Tribunal emphasized the stringent nature of penalty provisions under section 271(1)(c) for deterring economic offenses and upheld penalties in cases of deliberate income concealment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121550</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>