<?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 1098 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362271</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld penalties under Sections 271AA and 271G against the assessee for failing to maintain and provide necessary documents as required by Rule 10D and Section 92D of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s arguments of substantial compliance and the contention that external comparables were unnecessary under the Cost Plus Method. The penalties imposed by lower authorities were confirmed, and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2018 08:29:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=524474" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 1098 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362271</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld penalties under Sections 271AA and 271G against the assessee for failing to maintain and provide necessary documents as required by Rule 10D and Section 92D of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal rejected the assessee&#039;s arguments of substantial compliance and the contention that external comparables were unnecessary under the Cost Plus Method. The penalties imposed by lower authorities were confirmed, and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>