<?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 (12) TMI 1006 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336361</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to delete penalties imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2002-03 and 2003-04. The Tribunal found no defects in the allocation method of expenses for the unit eligible for deduction under Section 80IA, concluding that the assessee&#039;s actions did not warrant penalties for furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, stating that the issue did not raise any substantial question of law, emphasizing that the expense allocation was a matter of opinion and did not signify deliberate concealment or inaccuracies in income particulars.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 May 2026 10:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1006 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336361</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to delete penalties imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2002-03 and 2003-04. The Tribunal found no defects in the allocation method of expenses for the unit eligible for deduction under Section 80IA, concluding that the assessee&#039;s actions did not warrant penalties for furnishing inaccurate particulars. The Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, stating that the issue did not raise any substantial question of law, emphasizing that the expense allocation was a matter of opinion and did not signify deliberate concealment or inaccuracies in income particulars.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336361</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>