<?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 (7) TMI 103 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344991</link>
    <description>The appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10 was dismissed, upholding the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. For AY 2010-11, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to reassess the rental income based on the High Court&#039;s guidelines. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to established legal principles and factual accuracy in both cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2017 18:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=479009" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 103 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344991</link>
      <description>The appeal for Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10 was dismissed, upholding the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act. For AY 2010-11, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to reassess the rental income based on the High Court&#039;s guidelines. The Tribunal emphasized adherence to established legal principles and factual accuracy in both cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344991</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>