<?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 (10) TMI 132 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368166</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the necessity of a specific charge in the notice for penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and held that the penalty based on a notice lacking specificity is not sustainable. The decision highlighted the importance of following the view favorable to the assessee in case of conflicting interpretations, ultimately canceling the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2018 08:22:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=536802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 132 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368166</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the necessity of a specific charge in the notice for penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and held that the penalty based on a notice lacking specificity is not sustainable. The decision highlighted the importance of following the view favorable to the assessee in case of conflicting interpretations, ultimately canceling the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>