<?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 (12) TMI 522 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254178</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed in a case concerning the imposition of a penalty under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act. The court concluded that the transactions between the Director and the Company were genuine and necessary for business exigencies, thus setting aside the penalty. The court considered various judicial precedents and found no mala fide intent in the transactions. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the penalty was overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2014 18:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 522 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254178</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed in a case concerning the imposition of a penalty under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act. The court concluded that the transactions between the Director and the Company were genuine and necessary for business exigencies, thus setting aside the penalty. The court considered various judicial precedents and found no mala fide intent in the transactions. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the penalty was overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>