<?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>2012 (1) TMI 346 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273008</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant&#039;s reliance on counsel&#039;s advice for claiming exemption under section 54F was deemed bonafide, leading to the conclusion that the penalty was unwarranted. The Assessing Officer was directed to delete the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 16:04:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522042" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (1) TMI 346 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273008</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant&#039;s reliance on counsel&#039;s advice for claiming exemption under section 54F was deemed bonafide, leading to the conclusion that the penalty was unwarranted. The Assessing Officer was directed to delete the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273008</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>