<?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 (3) TMI 889 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122487</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty of Rs. 37,89,520 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was canceled as the assessee&#039;s explanation for filing a revised return was deemed bona fide and made before any detection of concealment by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the conditions for imposing the penalty were not met, allowing the appeal of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:37:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159472" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 889 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122487</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty of Rs. 37,89,520 imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was canceled as the assessee&#039;s explanation for filing a revised return was deemed bona fide and made before any detection of concealment by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the conditions for imposing the penalty were not met, allowing the appeal of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122487</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>