<?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 660 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363352</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The judgment emphasized the necessity of establishing intentional wrongdoing for penalty imposition under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, clarifying that not every disallowed claim automatically attracts penalty, aligning with legislative intent and legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2018 08:25:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=526523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 660 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363352</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The judgment emphasized the necessity of establishing intentional wrongdoing for penalty imposition under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, clarifying that not every disallowed claim automatically attracts penalty, aligning with legislative intent and legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363352</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>