<?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 (5) TMI 121 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342383</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision was based on procedural irregularities, specifically the ambiguity in the penalty notice and the Assessing Officer&#039;s failure to apply the correct section. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clarity and proper application of mind in penalty proceedings, leading to the deletion of the penalty due to violations of procedural norms.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 May 2017 08:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467394" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 121 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342383</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision was based on procedural irregularities, specifically the ambiguity in the penalty notice and the Assessing Officer&#039;s failure to apply the correct section. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clarity and proper application of mind in penalty proceedings, leading to the deletion of the penalty due to violations of procedural norms.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342383</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>