<?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>2006 (7) TMI 118 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4490</link>
    <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the assessee&#039;s actions were bona fide and there was no concealment of income or material facts. The court held that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act was not justified as there was no intent to deceive the authorities. The appeal was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 11:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43832" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 118 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4490</link>
      <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the assessee&#039;s actions were bona fide and there was no concealment of income or material facts. The court held that the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act was not justified as there was no intent to deceive the authorities. The appeal was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4490</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>