<?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>2017 (2) TMI 550 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338850</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeal and reversing the decision of the First Appellate Authority. The Tribunal emphasized that penalties under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on debatable issues, particularly after the admission of a substantial question of law by the High Court. Legal precedents and discussions supported the Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the Revenue&#039;s appeal and uphold the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:04:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458419" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 550 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338850</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeal and reversing the decision of the First Appellate Authority. The Tribunal emphasized that penalties under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on debatable issues, particularly after the admission of a substantial question of law by the High Court. Legal precedents and discussions supported the Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the Revenue&#039;s appeal and uphold the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338850</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>