<?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>2010 (8) TMI 1024 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182353</link>
    <description>The appeals were successful in challenging penalties under sections 271E and 271D for violations of sections 269T and 269SS. The penalties were overturned as the transactions were deemed not to be for tax evasion purposes but between sister-concerns. The Coordinate Bench ruled in favor of the appellant, deleting both penalties, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 May 2016 17:32:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427381" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 1024 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182353</link>
      <description>The appeals were successful in challenging penalties under sections 271E and 271D for violations of sections 269T and 269SS. The penalties were overturned as the transactions were deemed not to be for tax evasion purposes but between sister-concerns. The Coordinate Bench ruled in favor of the appellant, deleting both penalties, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182353</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>