<?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>2009 (5) TMI 924 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178420</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the CIT(Appeals) order and restoring the penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the penalty order was not barred by limitation and upheld the penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, as the assessee failed to substantiate the explanation regarding the gifts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2016 13:06:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 924 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178420</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the CIT(Appeals) order and restoring the penalty imposed by the AO under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the penalty order was not barred by limitation and upheld the penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, as the assessee failed to substantiate the explanation regarding the gifts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>