<?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 (10) TMI 586 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333566</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 158BFA(2) of the Income Tax Act but directed the recalibration of the penalty calculation to align with the provisions of the Act. It emphasized the correct application of the provisos and calculation of the penalty based on undisclosed income exceeding the amount shown in the return.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2016 10:05:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445097" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 586 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333566</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalty under Section 158BFA(2) of the Income Tax Act but directed the recalibration of the penalty calculation to align with the provisions of the Act. It emphasized the correct application of the provisos and calculation of the penalty based on undisclosed income exceeding the amount shown in the return.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333566</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>