<?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 (9) TMI 775 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216967</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s decision to uphold a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court found that the penalty imposition on the firm, due to an inadvertent error in not adding a provision for gratuity to total income, was unjustified. Emphasizing the absence of intent to conceal income and the human error involved, the Court concluded that the penalty was unwarranted considering the circumstances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Feb 2020 14:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 775 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216967</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s decision to uphold a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court found that the penalty imposition on the firm, due to an inadvertent error in not adding a provision for gratuity to total income, was unjustified. Emphasizing the absence of intent to conceal income and the human error involved, the Court concluded that the penalty was unwarranted considering the circumstances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216967</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>