<?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 724 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368758</link>
    <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was erroneous. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty imposed. The ITAT emphasized that the mere disallowance of purchases on an ad hoc basis did not amount to a deliberate attempt to furnish inaccurate particulars of income. The decision was pronounced on 05th October 2018.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Oct 2018 15:07:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538256" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 724 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368758</link>
      <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was erroneous. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, directing the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty imposed. The ITAT emphasized that the mere disallowance of purchases on an ad hoc basis did not amount to a deliberate attempt to furnish inaccurate particulars of income. The decision was pronounced on 05th October 2018.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>