<?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>2016 (8) TMI 1227 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192966</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It held that the company did not furnish inaccurate particulars of income, emphasizing that an incorrect claim does not amount to inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal considered the debatable nature of the issue and concluded that the penalty was not justified, referencing relevant case law to support its decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:23:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=479766" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1227 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192966</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It held that the company did not furnish inaccurate particulars of income, emphasizing that an incorrect claim does not amount to inaccurate particulars. The Tribunal considered the debatable nature of the issue and concluded that the penalty was not justified, referencing relevant case law to support its decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>