<?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 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341320</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) invalid due to procedural lapses, lack of specific grounds in penalty notices, and failure to establish clear evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars. Penalties for all three assessment years were directed to be deleted, emphasizing procedural fairness and clear communication in penalty proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Apr 2017 07:32:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=464948" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341320</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) invalid due to procedural lapses, lack of specific grounds in penalty notices, and failure to establish clear evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars. Penalties for all three assessment years were directed to be deleted, emphasizing procedural fairness and clear communication in penalty proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>