<?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 1077 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336432</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, holding that the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act were invalid due to vague satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer and the issuance of vague notices. The Tribunal also held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) of the Act was not applicable to the additional income declared during the survey. Consequently, the penalty orders were quashed, and the penalties were deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:54:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452404" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1077 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336432</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, holding that the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act were invalid due to vague satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer and the issuance of vague notices. The Tribunal also held that Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c) of the Act was not applicable to the additional income declared during the survey. Consequently, the penalty orders were quashed, and the penalties were deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>