<?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 (3) TMI 533 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325349</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, disagreeing with the lower authorities&#039; findings. It found the assessee had voluntarily offered the disallowance, maintained proper accounts, and not furnished inaccurate particulars. The judgment stressed the importance of voluntary disclosure and adherence to legal provisions in penalty imposition under the Income Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2016 10:12:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 533 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325349</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed the appeal, disagreeing with the lower authorities&#039; findings. It found the assessee had voluntarily offered the disallowance, maintained proper accounts, and not furnished inaccurate particulars. The judgment stressed the importance of voluntary disclosure and adherence to legal provisions in penalty imposition under the Income Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325349</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>