<?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>2019 (1) TMI 742 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373577</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, canceling the penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) for both cases. The Tribunal found that the penalty notices lacked specificity and failed to prove intentional concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars by the assessee. The Tribunal&#039;s decision aligned with legal precedents, leading to the quashing of the penalty orders on jurisdictional and substantive grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:57:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553132" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 742 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373577</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, canceling the penalty orders under Section 271(1)(c) for both cases. The Tribunal found that the penalty notices lacked specificity and failed to prove intentional concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars by the assessee. The Tribunal&#039;s decision aligned with legal precedents, leading to the quashing of the penalty orders on jurisdictional and substantive grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>