<?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>2004 (5) TMI 594 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189402</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to cancel the penalty of Rs. 2,37,775 imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The Tribunal considered various legal interpretations, precedents, and the absence of Assessing Officer&#039;s satisfaction as crucial factors in affirming the penalty cancellation. The retrospective effect of the amendment to section 271(1)(c) was also addressed, clarifying its inapplicability to the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2017 18:18:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 594 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189402</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to cancel the penalty of Rs. 2,37,775 imposed on the assessee under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. The Tribunal considered various legal interpretations, precedents, and the absence of Assessing Officer&#039;s satisfaction as crucial factors in affirming the penalty cancellation. The retrospective effect of the amendment to section 271(1)(c) was also addressed, clarifying its inapplicability to the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>