<?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 (9) TMI 997 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264329</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal, reinstating the penalty of Rs. 4,10,923/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, based on specific additions related to unverifiable purchases. The ITAT emphasized the specificity of the AO&#039;s findings and the lack of bona fide explanation from the assessee, thus validating the penalty under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and its Explanation 1(B).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2015 12:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398348" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 997 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264329</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal, reinstating the penalty of Rs. 4,10,923/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, based on specific additions related to unverifiable purchases. The ITAT emphasized the specificity of the AO&#039;s findings and the lack of bona fide explanation from the assessee, thus validating the penalty under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and its Explanation 1(B).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>