<?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 (8) TMI 1555 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366083</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. It affirmed that the respondent assessee had not concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars, and the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not justified. The appeal did not involve any substantial question of law, and thus, the High Court did not entertain it.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2018 07:03:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=532348" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1555 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366083</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. It affirmed that the respondent assessee had not concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars, and the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was not justified. The appeal did not involve any substantial question of law, and thus, the High Court did not entertain it.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366083</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>