<?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 715 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254372</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was concluded that as the addition to income was made on an estimate basis after rejecting the books of account, and no positive act of concealment was proven, the penalty was not justified. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, confirming that penalties cannot be levied on estimated additions without evidence of concealment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371591" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 715 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254372</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It was concluded that as the addition to income was made on an estimate basis after rejecting the books of account, and no positive act of concealment was proven, the penalty was not justified. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, confirming that penalties cannot be levied on estimated additions without evidence of concealment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254372</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>