<?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 (10) TMI 940 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349785</link>
    <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for disallowance of exemption under section 54. Despite pending appeals on quantum additions, the Court upheld the deletion based on the debatable legal issue and the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of Revenue&#039;s objections against the exemption. The Court dismissed the tax appeal, emphasizing the thorough examination by the Tribunal and the lack of suppression of material facts by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2017 08:19:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=493368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 940 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349785</link>
      <description>The High Court affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s decision to delete the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for disallowance of exemption under section 54. Despite pending appeals on quantum additions, the Court upheld the deletion based on the debatable legal issue and the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of Revenue&#039;s objections against the exemption. The Court dismissed the tax appeal, emphasizing the thorough examination by the Tribunal and the lack of suppression of material facts by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349785</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>