<?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>Taxpayer Penalized for Unexplained Expenses u/s 69C; 100% Penalty on Evaded Tax Upheld by CIT(A.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=38518</link>
    <description>Addition made u/s 69C was due to the reason that the assessee failed to explain the source of said expenses. Accordingly, we concur with the view of ld. CIT (A) to restrict the penalty to 100% of the tax to be evaded of such income - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:54:29 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:54:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514107" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Taxpayer Penalized for Unexplained Expenses u/s 69C; 100% Penalty on Evaded Tax Upheld by CIT(A.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=38518</link>
      <description>Addition made u/s 69C was due to the reason that the assessee failed to explain the source of said expenses. Accordingly, we concur with the view of ld. CIT (A) to restrict the penalty to 100% of the tax to be evaded of such income - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:54:29 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=38518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>