<?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 (2) TMI 868 - ITAT, Mumbai</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208693</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was not justified as there was no concealment by the assessee, and the difference in deduction claimed under Section 10A was due to a mere difference of opinion. The penalty was deleted, and the appeal by the assessee was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2013 17:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182154" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 868 - ITAT, Mumbai</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208693</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was not justified as there was no concealment by the assessee, and the difference in deduction claimed under Section 10A was due to a mere difference of opinion. The penalty was deleted, and the appeal by the assessee was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208693</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>