<?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>2018 (4) TMI 1068 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358957</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was defective as it did not specify the exact charge against the assessee. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty imposition could not be sustained due to the defective notice. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the assessee challenging the partial penalty was deemed infructuous. The decision was pronounced on 20.04.2018.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2018 06:03:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=517561" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1068 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358957</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act was defective as it did not specify the exact charge against the assessee. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty imposition could not be sustained due to the defective notice. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the cross-objection by the assessee challenging the partial penalty was deemed infructuous. The decision was pronounced on 20.04.2018.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>