<?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>2001 (1) TMI 963 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170785</link>
    <description>The appeal challenging the deletion of the penalty under section 271B based on the interpretation and applicability of section 44AB was dismissed. The tribunal held that the assessee was not required to obtain an audit report under section 44AB as its income was exempt under section 10(23D) and did not form part of the total income. Therefore, the cancellation of the penalty was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2015 13:25:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=387572" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 963 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170785</link>
      <description>The appeal challenging the deletion of the penalty under section 271B based on the interpretation and applicability of section 44AB was dismissed. The tribunal held that the assessee was not required to obtain an audit report under section 44AB as its income was exempt under section 10(23D) and did not form part of the total income. Therefore, the cancellation of the penalty was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170785</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>