<?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>2014 (1) TMI 1682 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177130</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, holding that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified due to the invalid notice, lack of satisfaction recorded by the A.O., and the bona fide explanation provided by the assessee. The penalty proceedings were found to be void ab initio, and the penalty was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Dec 2017 10:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411780" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 1682 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177130</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, holding that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not justified due to the invalid notice, lack of satisfaction recorded by the A.O., and the bona fide explanation provided by the assessee. The penalty proceedings were found to be void ab initio, and the penalty was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177130</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>