<?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 825 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272120</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the penalty of Rs. 95,00,000 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2007-08. The penalty was related to the disallowance of valuation loss on converted stock of shares, with the Assessee successfully arguing that the conversion and valuation were done in good faith and in accordance with standard accounting practices. The Tribunal found the Assessee&#039;s actions bona fide, supported by Board resolutions and market data, leading to the deletion of the penalty on merits. Additionally, a procedural discrepancy in the initiation and levy of penalty further invalidated the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2016 09:10:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417782" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 825 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272120</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the penalty of Rs. 95,00,000 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2007-08. The penalty was related to the disallowance of valuation loss on converted stock of shares, with the Assessee successfully arguing that the conversion and valuation were done in good faith and in accordance with standard accounting practices. The Tribunal found the Assessee&#039;s actions bona fide, supported by Board resolutions and market data, leading to the deletion of the penalty on merits. Additionally, a procedural discrepancy in the initiation and levy of penalty further invalidated the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>