<?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>2015 (1) TMI 521 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255322</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the deletion of penalties by the First Appellate Authority, emphasizing that penalties under Section 271(1)(c) are not applicable to estimated additions or voluntary disclosures made to avoid litigation. Concrete evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars was deemed necessary for penalties, which was lacking in this case. The Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, leading to the deletion of penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2015 12:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373875" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 521 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255322</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the deletion of penalties by the First Appellate Authority, emphasizing that penalties under Section 271(1)(c) are not applicable to estimated additions or voluntary disclosures made to avoid litigation. Concrete evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars was deemed necessary for penalties, which was lacking in this case. The Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, leading to the deletion of penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>