<?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>Court Examines Section 271(1)(c) Penalty: Unexplained Investment Not Automatically Guilty of Concealment or Inaccuracy.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33469</link>
    <description>Penalty u/ 271(1)(c) - unexplained investment - assessee should have been careful cannot be doubted, but the absence of due care, in a case such as the present, does not mean that the assessee is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:47:22 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:47:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Court Examines Section 271(1)(c) Penalty: Unexplained Investment Not Automatically Guilty of Concealment or Inaccuracy.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33469</link>
      <description>Penalty u/ 271(1)(c) - unexplained investment - assessee should have been careful cannot be doubted, but the absence of due care, in a case such as the present, does not mean that the assessee is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:47:22 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33469</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>