<?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 (9) TMI 502 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332241</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision was based on the lack of sufficient explanation for income computation errors and failure to demonstrate the bona fide nature of mistakes. The judgment highlighted the importance of providing detailed justifications in tax matters to avoid penalties, referencing a precedent involving Price Waterhouse Coopers P.Ltd.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:33:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440943" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 502 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332241</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision was based on the lack of sufficient explanation for income computation errors and failure to demonstrate the bona fide nature of mistakes. The judgment highlighted the importance of providing detailed justifications in tax matters to avoid penalties, referencing a precedent involving Price Waterhouse Coopers P.Ltd.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332241</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>