<?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 (8) TMI 857 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122819</link>
    <description>The Tribunal confirmed the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for inaccurate particulars and false claim of deduction. The assessee&#039;s withdrawal of the claim post-survey indicated lack of bona fide belief. The Tribunal emphasized that the claim was not made in good faith, despite efforts to avoid litigation. The penalty was set aside for statistical purposes pending verification of the built-up area of merged flats to determine penalty justification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:20:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 857 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122819</link>
      <description>The Tribunal confirmed the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act for inaccurate particulars and false claim of deduction. The assessee&#039;s withdrawal of the claim post-survey indicated lack of bona fide belief. The Tribunal emphasized that the claim was not made in good faith, despite efforts to avoid litigation. The penalty was set aside for statistical purposes pending verification of the built-up area of merged flats to determine penalty justification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122819</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>