<?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 (5) TMI 648 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209399</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 158BFA(2) as no evidence of undisclosed income was found during the search operation. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that undisclosed income must be determined based on evidence discovered during the search. Since no such evidence was found, the penalty was deemed unsustainable, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jul 2013 14:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182848" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 648 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209399</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 158BFA(2) as no evidence of undisclosed income was found during the search operation. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that undisclosed income must be determined based on evidence discovered during the search. Since no such evidence was found, the penalty was deemed unsustainable, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209399</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>