<?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 (6) TMI 847 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329138</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2005-06. The appellant&#039;s challenge to the penalty for concealment of income due to ceased trade liabilities under Section 41(1) was dismissed. Despite arguments against the penalty&#039;s imposition, the Court found the appellant&#039;s claims unsubstantiated and affirmed the penalty, emphasizing the false nature of the liabilities shown and the obligation to disclose ceased liabilities. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with no costs awarded, as the Court concluded that no substantial legal question arose in the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432606" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 847 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329138</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2005-06. The appellant&#039;s challenge to the penalty for concealment of income due to ceased trade liabilities under Section 41(1) was dismissed. Despite arguments against the penalty&#039;s imposition, the Court found the appellant&#039;s claims unsubstantiated and affirmed the penalty, emphasizing the false nature of the liabilities shown and the obligation to disclose ceased liabilities. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with no costs awarded, as the Court concluded that no substantial legal question arose in the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>