<?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 462 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363154</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained where taxable income is determined only by estimation on bank deposits and the penalty record contains no independent finding of fraud, gross negligence, deliberate concealment, or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. A mere sustained quantum addition does not by itself prove concealment when the assessment rests on an estimated rate. On that basis, the penalty was deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2018 08:25:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=526197" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 462 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363154</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained where taxable income is determined only by estimation on bank deposits and the penalty record contains no independent finding of fraud, gross negligence, deliberate concealment, or furnishing of inaccurate particulars. A mere sustained quantum addition does not by itself prove concealment when the assessment rests on an estimated rate. On that basis, the penalty was deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363154</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>