<?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 (3) TMI 1037 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180120</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that penalties under section 271(1)(c) were not justified on debatable issues or where the assessee had provided a bonafide explanation. Penalties were upheld only on the incorrect claim of additional depreciation and the disallowed deduction under section 80IA on interest income. The appeal of the assessee was partly allowed, and the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2016 10:27:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420429" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 1037 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180120</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that penalties under section 271(1)(c) were not justified on debatable issues or where the assessee had provided a bonafide explanation. Penalties were upheld only on the incorrect claim of additional depreciation and the disallowed deduction under section 80IA on interest income. The appeal of the assessee was partly allowed, and the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>