<?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 860 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368894</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing the Assessing Officer to cancel the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) due to the invalidity of the notice specifying the charge clearly. The Tribunal found that the penalty notice&#039;s ambiguity regarding the specific charge rendered it invalid, emphasizing the need to follow the view favorable to the assessee when two views are available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2018 09:50:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538509" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 860 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368894</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order and directing the Assessing Officer to cancel the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) due to the invalidity of the notice specifying the charge clearly. The Tribunal found that the penalty notice&#039;s ambiguity regarding the specific charge rendered it invalid, emphasizing the need to follow the view favorable to the assessee when two views are available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368894</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>