<?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 (5) TMI 415 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327434</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee company. The Tribunal directed a fresh consideration by the AO, emphasizing the need for comprehensive evidence to support the legitimacy of the claim for interest expenditure related to a canceled development project.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 May 2016 10:41:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 415 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327434</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee company. The Tribunal directed a fresh consideration by the AO, emphasizing the need for comprehensive evidence to support the legitimacy of the claim for interest expenditure related to a canceled development project.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327434</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>