<?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>Penalty Contested u/s 271(1)(c) for Notice Defect; No Prejudice Found Against Assessee After a Decade.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=39215</link>
    <description>Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defect in the notice - it was only after 10 years, when the appeals were listed for final hearing, this issue is sought to be raised - even assuming that there was defect in the notice, it had caused no prejudice to the assessee and the assessee clearly understood what was the purport and import of notice issued under Section 274 r/w.Section 271 of the Act. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2018 14:59:09 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2018 14:59:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Penalty Contested u/s 271(1)(c) for Notice Defect; No Prejudice Found Against Assessee After a Decade.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=39215</link>
      <description>Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - defect in the notice - it was only after 10 years, when the appeals were listed for final hearing, this issue is sought to be raised - even assuming that there was defect in the notice, it had caused no prejudice to the assessee and the assessee clearly understood what was the purport and import of notice issued under Section 274 r/w.Section 271 of the Act. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2018 14:59:09 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=39215</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>