<?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 664 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215165</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decision that no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) should be levied due to the bonafide nature of the mistakes made by the assessee. The Court found no substantial question of law arising from the case and affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s conclusions regarding the disallowance of penalty for depreciation claims and provision for taxation, emphasizing the absence of intention to furnish inaccurate particulars.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=188554" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 664 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215165</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decision that no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) should be levied due to the bonafide nature of the mistakes made by the assessee. The Court found no substantial question of law arising from the case and affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s conclusions regarding the disallowance of penalty for depreciation claims and provision for taxation, emphasizing the absence of intention to furnish inaccurate particulars.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215165</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>