<?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 (7) TMI 503 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329905</link>
    <description>The appellant, engaged in construction business, initially did not declare short term capital gains from a development agreement in the original return for the assessment year 2009-10. After a survey revealed undeclared income, the appellant revised the return to disclose the capital gains. The Assessing Officer accepted the revised return, but initiated penalty proceedings for alleged concealment of income. The Tribunal ultimately canceled the penalty, ruling that the voluntary disclosure in the revised return, along with submission of relevant documents, demonstrated no concealment. The Tribunal&#039;s decision aligned with judicial precedents emphasizing complete disclosure and the timing of charging capital gains based on receipt of sale consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:07:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=434710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 503 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329905</link>
      <description>The appellant, engaged in construction business, initially did not declare short term capital gains from a development agreement in the original return for the assessment year 2009-10. After a survey revealed undeclared income, the appellant revised the return to disclose the capital gains. The Assessing Officer accepted the revised return, but initiated penalty proceedings for alleged concealment of income. The Tribunal ultimately canceled the penalty, ruling that the voluntary disclosure in the revised return, along with submission of relevant documents, demonstrated no concealment. The Tribunal&#039;s decision aligned with judicial precedents emphasizing complete disclosure and the timing of charging capital gains based on receipt of sale consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329905</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>