<?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 (6) TMI 148 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361321</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the assessee did not conceal income or provide inaccurate particulars. The denial of exemption under section 11 was considered a change of opinion and a debatable issue. The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals, emphasizing the absence of concealment or inaccuracies, and deleted the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2018 17:23:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522477" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 148 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361321</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the assessee did not conceal income or provide inaccurate particulars. The denial of exemption under section 11 was considered a change of opinion and a debatable issue. The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals, emphasizing the absence of concealment or inaccuracies, and deleted the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361321</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>