<?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 (3) TMI 1540 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192420</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found discrepancies between the grounds stated in the assessment order and the penalty notice, emphasizing the need for coherence in penalty imposition. The judgment on 22nd March 2017 stressed aligning grounds for initiating and imposing penalties to uphold fairness and legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 May 2017 06:58:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=470457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 1540 - ITAT RAJKOT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192420</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. It found discrepancies between the grounds stated in the assessment order and the penalty notice, emphasizing the need for coherence in penalty imposition. The judgment on 22nd March 2017 stressed aligning grounds for initiating and imposing penalties to uphold fairness and legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>