<?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>2011 (8) TMI 1265 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191696</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal regarding the estimation of net income, directing the Assessing Officer to apply a 6% net profit rate on gross contract receipts instead of the initially estimated 10%. In the case of the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, the Tribunal deleted the penalty, emphasizing that penalties cannot be imposed based on estimates without evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2018 11:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=465776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 1265 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191696</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal regarding the estimation of net income, directing the Assessing Officer to apply a 6% net profit rate on gross contract receipts instead of the initially estimated 10%. In the case of the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, the Tribunal deleted the penalty, emphasizing that penalties cannot be imposed based on estimates without evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191696</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>