<?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>2012 (6) TMI 261 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213941</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the penalty on the declared undisclosed income of Rs.3 lakhs due to the appellant&#039;s failure to prove its source, deeming it mandatory under section 158BFA(2). However, the court showed leniency by excluding the penalty on the additional amount of Rs.1,15,000 to prevent the assessee from overpaying beyond the undisclosed income, considering taxes, penalties, and interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2012 09:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187341" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 261 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213941</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the penalty on the declared undisclosed income of Rs.3 lakhs due to the appellant&#039;s failure to prove its source, deeming it mandatory under section 158BFA(2). However, the court showed leniency by excluding the penalty on the additional amount of Rs.1,15,000 to prevent the assessee from overpaying beyond the undisclosed income, considering taxes, penalties, and interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213941</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>