<?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>2016 (2) TMI 45 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271340</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) canceling the penalty for a claimed business loss that was disallowed during assessment proceedings. The Tribunal found that there was no intent to conceal income as the claimed expenditure was for a business that was set up but not commenced, and there was no intent to carry forward the loss. The Tribunal also noted the automatic reflection of carry forward loss in the E-return and the absence of such claims in subsequent years. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose. The application of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) regarding deemed concealment of loss reduction was not entertained as it was not the grievance before the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jun 2016 10:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 45 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271340</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) canceling the penalty for a claimed business loss that was disallowed during assessment proceedings. The Tribunal found that there was no intent to conceal income as the claimed expenditure was for a business that was set up but not commenced, and there was no intent to carry forward the loss. The Tribunal also noted the automatic reflection of carry forward loss in the E-return and the absence of such claims in subsequent years. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose. The application of Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) regarding deemed concealment of loss reduction was not entertained as it was not the grievance before the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271340</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>