<?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>1998 (4) TMI 501 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151982</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. It found that the revised return was voluntarily filed before the notice under Section 148, and there was no evidence of deliberate concealment of income. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee&#039;s actions were aimed at resolving the matter amicably and avoiding litigation, leading to the penalty being deemed unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:41:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 501 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151982</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. It found that the revised return was voluntarily filed before the notice under Section 148, and there was no evidence of deliberate concealment of income. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee&#039;s actions were aimed at resolving the matter amicably and avoiding litigation, leading to the penalty being deemed unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151982</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>