<?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>2012 (4) TMI 712 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190784</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee against penalty orders under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2006-07. The tribunal held that the penalty was unwarranted as the additional income disclosed by the assessee was voluntary and not a result of concealment, but rather due to clerical errors and rectifications based on existing records. Therefore, the penalty was deleted for all three assessment years.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:52:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459858" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 712 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190784</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee against penalty orders under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2006-07. The tribunal held that the penalty was unwarranted as the additional income disclosed by the assessee was voluntary and not a result of concealment, but rather due to clerical errors and rectifications based on existing records. Therefore, the penalty was deleted for all three assessment years.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190784</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>