<?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 1183 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330585</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, leading to the deletion of the penalty of Rs. 24,20,000/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The Tribunal found that the issue regarding the eligibility of deduction under Section 10BA was debatable, and the assessee had disclosed all material facts in good faith, thus concluding that there was no deliberate concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars justifying the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 13:16:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=436710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1183 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330585</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, leading to the deletion of the penalty of Rs. 24,20,000/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The Tribunal found that the issue regarding the eligibility of deduction under Section 10BA was debatable, and the assessee had disclosed all material facts in good faith, thus concluding that there was no deliberate concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars justifying the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>