<?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 (7) TMI 355 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363047</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed due to the lack of specificity in the penalty notice and the non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal emphasized the need for clear penalty notices to uphold natural justice principles. The penalty of Rs. 7,50,000 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was deleted, and the CIT(A)&#039;s decision confirming the penalty was overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jul 2018 08:15:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=526022" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 355 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363047</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed due to the lack of specificity in the penalty notice and the non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal emphasized the need for clear penalty notices to uphold natural justice principles. The penalty of Rs. 7,50,000 imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was deleted, and the CIT(A)&#039;s decision confirming the penalty was overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>