<?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>2001 (7) TMI 107 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14049</link>
    <description>Reasonable cause existed for delay in filing the return and completing the tax audit where the assessee&#039;s books were impounded by the Department and remained in its custody. The assessee sought photostat copies, but they were supplied only later; the audit and return filing followed thereafter. On these facts, the delay was attributable to the Department rather than the assessee, so penalty under section 44AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:32:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53049" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 107 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14049</link>
      <description>Reasonable cause existed for delay in filing the return and completing the tax audit where the assessee&#039;s books were impounded by the Department and remained in its custody. The assessee sought photostat copies, but they were supplied only later; the audit and return filing followed thereafter. On these facts, the delay was attributable to the Department rather than the assessee, so penalty under section 44AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>