<?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>2014 (2) TMI 368 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243771</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2008-2009. The Tribunal found the issue of taxability under different heads debatable and concluded there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee. Therefore, the penalty was not justified, and the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 368 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243771</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to delete the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2008-2009. The Tribunal found the issue of taxability under different heads debatable and concluded there was no concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the assessee. Therefore, the penalty was not justified, and the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>