<?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 (9) TMI 280 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201632</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for the Assessment Year 1999-2000. The penalties for various disallowances were set aside or deleted as the assessee demonstrated full disclosure, no deliberate attempt to conceal income, and bona fide beliefs in treating losses, leading to the respondent-assessee not being liable for penalties under the Income Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:17:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175236" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 280 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201632</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for the Assessment Year 1999-2000. The penalties for various disallowances were set aside or deleted as the assessee demonstrated full disclosure, no deliberate attempt to conceal income, and bona fide beliefs in treating losses, leading to the respondent-assessee not being liable for penalties under the Income Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>