<?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>2001 (8) TMI 1409 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188506</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 1998-99, as the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income by relying on a flawed valuation report for determining the cost of acquisition of a property. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the assessee&#039;s responsibility to ensure the accuracy of income particulars disclosed in the return.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2016 12:43:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=450467" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 1409 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188506</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 1998-99, as the assessee furnished inaccurate particulars of income by relying on a flawed valuation report for determining the cost of acquisition of a property. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the assessee&#039;s responsibility to ensure the accuracy of income particulars disclosed in the return.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188506</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>