<?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 (11) TMI 795 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334777</link>
    <description>The Court quashed the order under section 264 of the Income-tax Act and set aside the penalty imposed under sections 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) due to the lack of evidence supporting concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The decision favored the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of proper assessment to justify penalties under the Income-tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:50:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 795 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334777</link>
      <description>The Court quashed the order under section 264 of the Income-tax Act and set aside the penalty imposed under sections 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) due to the lack of evidence supporting concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The decision favored the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of proper assessment to justify penalties under the Income-tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>