<?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 1057 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373892</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, sustaining the penalty on cash found during the search but deleting the penalty on other surrendered items. The penalty proceedings were deemed valid despite the initial lack of specificity in the notice, as the final penalty order specified charges clearly. The Tribunal emphasized the discretionary nature of penalties under Section 271AAB, requiring a case-by-case assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2019 08:05:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=554173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 1057 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373892</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeal, sustaining the penalty on cash found during the search but deleting the penalty on other surrendered items. The penalty proceedings were deemed valid despite the initial lack of specificity in the notice, as the final penalty order specified charges clearly. The Tribunal emphasized the discretionary nature of penalties under Section 271AAB, requiring a case-by-case assessment.</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=373892</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>