<?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 (8) TMI 318 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330934</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, holding that penalties were not justified for the additions related to the difference in purchases, disallowance of balances written off, and dividend income exemption claim. The Tribunal emphasized that non-acceptance of claims or inadvertent errors in filings do not necessarily constitute concealment or inaccuracies warranting penalties under the Income Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2016 12:54:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=437728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 318 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330934</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, holding that penalties were not justified for the additions related to the difference in purchases, disallowance of balances written off, and dividend income exemption claim. The Tribunal emphasized that non-acceptance of claims or inadvertent errors in filings do not necessarily constitute concealment or inaccuracies warranting penalties under the Income Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330934</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>