<?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>2013 (5) TMI 882 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180909</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not attracted where an expenditure claim is fully disclosed, genuine, and not found to be bogus, even if it is disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct tax at source. A mere unsustainable claim in law does not amount to concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars when all relevant facts are on record. On these facts, the deletion of penalty was rightly upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:58:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=422491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (5) TMI 882 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180909</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not attracted where an expenditure claim is fully disclosed, genuine, and not found to be bogus, even if it is disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct tax at source. A mere unsustainable claim in law does not amount to concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars when all relevant facts are on record. On these facts, the deletion of penalty was rightly upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180909</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>