<?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 (7) TMI 489 - ITAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214919</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions to delete penalties in all three instances. It emphasized the absence of deliberate concealment or inaccurate particulars, highlighting the debatable nature of the issues. The judgments stressed the need for distinct considerations in penalty proceedings compared to assessment proceedings, ultimately affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions and dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=188310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 489 - ITAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214919</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions to delete penalties in all three instances. It emphasized the absence of deliberate concealment or inaccurate particulars, highlighting the debatable nature of the issues. The judgments stressed the need for distinct considerations in penalty proceedings compared to assessment proceedings, ultimately affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decisions and dismissing the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>