<?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 (11) TMI 469 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370126</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, deleting the penalties imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for both assessment years. It emphasized the importance of clear and specific charges in penalty notices and orders, stating penalties should not rely solely on estimated additions from valuation reports. The decision highlighted the need for strict interpretation of penal provisions and the rebuttable nature of presumptions under Explanation 5A.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Nov 2018 12:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541274" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 469 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370126</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, deleting the penalties imposed under Section 271(1)(c) for both assessment years. It emphasized the importance of clear and specific charges in penalty notices and orders, stating penalties should not rely solely on estimated additions from valuation reports. The decision highlighted the need for strict interpretation of penal provisions and the rebuttable nature of presumptions under Explanation 5A.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370126</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>