<?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 (7) TMI 1032 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249996</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty of Rs. 2,27,800 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was unjustified as there was no evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars. Relying on a decision by the Hon&#039;ble Calcutta High Court, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of following direct decisions and deleted the penalty. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the penalty was overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2014 08:35:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=360875" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 1032 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249996</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty of Rs. 2,27,800 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was unjustified as there was no evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars. Relying on a decision by the Hon&#039;ble Calcutta High Court, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of following direct decisions and deleted the penalty. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the penalty was overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249996</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>