<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1764 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277746</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2010-11, citing invalid penalty imposition due to the notice not specifying the grounds clearly. The appeal against the penalty for the assessment year 2011-12 was dismissed as the AO lacked jurisdiction to levy the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a penalty notice specifying grounds for penalty imposition under section 271(1)(c), resulting in the quashing of the penalty in both appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2018 05:51:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=547966" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1764 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277746</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2010-11, citing invalid penalty imposition due to the notice not specifying the grounds clearly. The appeal against the penalty for the assessment year 2011-12 was dismissed as the AO lacked jurisdiction to levy the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a penalty notice specifying grounds for penalty imposition under section 271(1)(c), resulting in the quashing of the penalty in both appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>