<?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 1169 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264501</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s orders and directed the AO to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for both assessment years. The decision was based on the lack of opportunity for the appellant to contest the evidence, the genuine nature of the commission payments, and the ambiguity in the penalty notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2015 00:14:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398865" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 1169 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264501</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s orders and directed the AO to delete the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for both assessment years. The decision was based on the lack of opportunity for the appellant to contest the evidence, the genuine nature of the commission payments, and the ambiguity in the penalty notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264501</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>