<?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 (5) TMI 424 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359860</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act to be defective due to lack of specificity in the exact charge, rendering the penalty unsustainable. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded in favor of the Assessee, deleting the penalty and allowing the appeal. The additional grounds raised were not adjudicated as the primary issue led to the cancellation of the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2018 13:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519229" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 424 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359860</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the penalty notice issued under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act to be defective due to lack of specificity in the exact charge, rendering the penalty unsustainable. Relying on legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded in favor of the Assessee, deleting the penalty and allowing the appeal. The additional grounds raised were not adjudicated as the primary issue led to the cancellation of the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359860</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>