<?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>2011 (5) TMI 927 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174507</link>
    <description>The ITAT confirmed the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the appellant&#039;s failure to disclose additional income of Rs. 40,00,000 in the return filed in response to a notice under section 153A. The non-disclosure was deemed intentional and not voluntary, as it occurred after the detection of undisclosed income during a search and seizure operation. The penalty was upheld by the CIT(A) and ultimately the appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2015 12:16:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=400711" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 927 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174507</link>
      <description>The ITAT confirmed the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) for the appellant&#039;s failure to disclose additional income of Rs. 40,00,000 in the return filed in response to a notice under section 153A. The non-disclosure was deemed intentional and not voluntary, as it occurred after the detection of undisclosed income during a search and seizure operation. The penalty was upheld by the CIT(A) and ultimately the appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174507</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>