<?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 (6) TMI 455 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260530</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, reducing the penalty under section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act to 2.5% of the self-assessment tax. The appellant&#039;s explanation for the delay in tax payment was not accepted due to contradictory financial positions. Despite citing case laws, the Tribunal emphasized the significance of timely tax compliance and financial transparency, leading to the penalty reduction based on the circumstances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2015 08:36:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=387635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (6) TMI 455 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260530</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, reducing the penalty under section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act to 2.5% of the self-assessment tax. The appellant&#039;s explanation for the delay in tax payment was not accepted due to contradictory financial positions. Despite citing case laws, the Tribunal emphasized the significance of timely tax compliance and financial transparency, leading to the penalty reduction based on the circumstances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>