<?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>2010 (4) TMI 868 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122360</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the penalty under section 271(1)(c) only for the loss related to tax payments, while ruling in favor of the assessee regarding the loss related to capital assets and security deposits. The Tribunal found that there was no bona fide belief regarding the tax payment loss, justifying the penalty, but acknowledged a genuine dispute over the nature of the other losses.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 17:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 868 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122360</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the penalty under section 271(1)(c) only for the loss related to tax payments, while ruling in favor of the assessee regarding the loss related to capital assets and security deposits. The Tribunal found that there was no bona fide belief regarding the tax payment loss, justifying the penalty, but acknowledged a genuine dispute over the nature of the other losses.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122360</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>